Details

      Description

      Many users are finding the new 4.1 UI unpleasant to the point of not upgrading. If the new UI were optional this would be less of a problem.
      See the extended discussion of this at http://forums.atlassian.com/message.jspa?messageID=257335567&tstart=0

      Atlassian Status as of 21 October 2010

      Hi guys,

      Many thanks for all the recent feedback and comments you've provided on the view issue screen.

      We have taken the feedback seriously, and in JIRA 4.2, which recently launched, we have taken in many suggestions for improvements. These include:

      • Tighter spacing between lines to reduce space between elements.
      • Stronger section headings that also have a different colour.
      • The 'Description' field separated into its own section.
      • Horizontal division lines between each custom field.
      • Votes and Watchers fields on the same line.
      • Labels represented as bubbles.

      JIRA 4.2 also include a whole host of other usability features. To find out more about JIRA 4.2, please refer to our release notes. We encourage you to try out our latest release. As always, we are open to your suggestions and feedback.

      Moving forward, we are still looking at options to further enhance to view issue screen, with our focus on allowing greater flexibility on the screen itself. As we have more complete ideas and designs, we will update you further on our progress.

      Many thanks,

      Roy Krishna
      JIRA Product Management
      roy at atlassian dot com

      1. Jira 4.1 Issue Screen issues (wemu).pdf
        176 kB
        werner mueller
      1. Attachments section with fixed row height in JIRA 4.2.png
        169 kB
      2. Attachments section with flexible row height mockup.png
        166 kB
      3. correct.png
        61 kB
      4. CustomFields_401.jpg
        12 kB
      5. CustomFields_42.jpg
        14 kB
      6. CustomFieldsNames_broken_into_next_line.jpg
        17 kB
      7. incorrect.png
        53 kB
      8. MM Sample.jpg
        112 kB
      9. screenshot-1.jpg
        99 kB
      10. Screen shot 2010-03-24 at 3.42.15 PM.png
        123 kB
      11. Screenshot-multiple-fileds.png
        125 kB
      12. View Issue Improvements.jpg
        165 kB
      13. View Issue Improvements - Annotated.jpg
        185 kB

        Issue Links

          Activity

          Hide
          Jo Strand added a comment -

          Why make something optional if nobody wants it - why not just accept failure, dump this useless "new look" wich adds nothing in useability, and move on? Does anyone from Atlassian want to defend this change? I'd love to hear someone try to explain in wich way this is an improvement.

          Show
          Jo Strand added a comment - Why make something optional if nobody wants it - why not just accept failure, dump this useless "new look" wich adds nothing in useability, and move on? Does anyone from Atlassian want to defend this change? I'd love to hear someone try to explain in wich way this is an improvement.
          Hide
          Nic Brough added a comment - - edited

          It all looks very washed out here, and sort of an attempt at web 2.0. Sadly, this was one of the reasons my users liked Jira - it had clear delineated areas for things which seem to have been watered down or de-emphasised (unlike the systems they were moving away from)

          It just makes it feel even more unclear than it was before because of that.

          Things I do like -

          1. People box and the feedback about vote/watch
          2. Similarly for the "dates" area
          3. The "view" option is handy
          4. Moving the details to the left - the human eye scans top left to bottom right on a web page (at least for those of us who read left to right languages), so putting the issue on the left means you catch the most relevant info first.
          5. Instinctively, the whole layout is wrong. But, after staring at it for a while, it's because I'm so used to Jira, I think it's just change resistance. Overall, I think I prefer this, although it will take some getting used to.

          However, these are far out-weighed by

          1. Loss of clarity on actions and operations - "Stuff I can do to this issue" should never be drawn to look like tabs, and although I know they're really buttons, they really look like tabs. This is totally cosmetic - drawing them in a different style would probably solve it, but I've already had "I can't see what I can actually DO here" three times. In 10 minutes
          2. Ok, re-arranging the whole layout means a bit of a learning curve, but I'm mostly for it. Except that links are in the middle of the issue and that feels wrong now. It worked ok on the old layout, but not here. I can't even tell you why, it's just instinctive (I've not looked at attachments or sub-tasks yet, but I'm dreading the same feeling)
          3. I'm not sure about the location and grouping of the workflow and actions (although the drop-down "more actions" is good if you really must go this way). Problem - I don't know how to improve it.
          4. Complete failure on comments - when making a comment, the box expands to cover bits of the main issue. This is not acceptable - people need the whole issue on-screen (notwithstanding long scroll bars if the page is long) so that they can refer back to it when commenting.

          Oh, just noticed - the "edit comment" and "link" buttons only appear when you mouse-over the comment bar. That is not how mouse-over should be used - you need to be totally clear that there is a good reason to mouse-over something for more options. (Try playing the early Lucas Arts adventure games - every gamer hated the screens that didn't signpost "there's something clickable here")

          Overall, the limited response so far boils down to

          1. It's changed and brought nothing new we like
          2. I can't see how to do anything with my issue
          3. We might as well use Trac/Mantis/Bugzilla if we want it to look that bad
          4. How do we fix the "comments" box?

          (Firefox here by the way, not tried other browsers)

          Show
          Nic Brough added a comment - - edited It all looks very washed out here, and sort of an attempt at web 2.0. Sadly, this was one of the reasons my users liked Jira - it had clear delineated areas for things which seem to have been watered down or de-emphasised (unlike the systems they were moving away from) It just makes it feel even more unclear than it was before because of that. Things I do like - People box and the feedback about vote/watch Similarly for the "dates" area The "view" option is handy Moving the details to the left - the human eye scans top left to bottom right on a web page (at least for those of us who read left to right languages), so putting the issue on the left means you catch the most relevant info first. Instinctively, the whole layout is wrong. But, after staring at it for a while, it's because I'm so used to Jira, I think it's just change resistance. Overall, I think I prefer this, although it will take some getting used to. However, these are far out-weighed by Loss of clarity on actions and operations - "Stuff I can do to this issue" should never be drawn to look like tabs, and although I know they're really buttons, they really look like tabs. This is totally cosmetic - drawing them in a different style would probably solve it, but I've already had "I can't see what I can actually DO here" three times. In 10 minutes Ok, re-arranging the whole layout means a bit of a learning curve, but I'm mostly for it. Except that links are in the middle of the issue and that feels wrong now. It worked ok on the old layout, but not here. I can't even tell you why, it's just instinctive (I've not looked at attachments or sub-tasks yet, but I'm dreading the same feeling) I'm not sure about the location and grouping of the workflow and actions (although the drop-down "more actions" is good if you really must go this way). Problem - I don't know how to improve it. Complete failure on comments - when making a comment, the box expands to cover bits of the main issue. This is not acceptable - people need the whole issue on-screen (notwithstanding long scroll bars if the page is long) so that they can refer back to it when commenting. Oh, just noticed - the "edit comment" and "link" buttons only appear when you mouse-over the comment bar. That is not how mouse-over should be used - you need to be totally clear that there is a good reason to mouse-over something for more options. (Try playing the early Lucas Arts adventure games - every gamer hated the screens that didn't signpost "there's something clickable here") Overall, the limited response so far boils down to It's changed and brought nothing new we like I can't see how to do anything with my issue We might as well use Trac/Mantis/Bugzilla if we want it to look that bad How do we fix the "comments" box? (Firefox here by the way, not tried other browsers)
          Hide
          Neil Arrowsmith added a comment -

          Added vote. Agree with what others have said here and on the forum. Whilst there are a few nice features, like the comment window and the way the summary stays at the top of the window when scrolling, the general look is just too "white". I'm ready to be persuaded otherwise, and interested to see how it looks with our own custom fields, workflow actions etc. but on what I see here, I won't be upgrading unless I can opt out of the new theme.

          Show
          Neil Arrowsmith added a comment - Added vote. Agree with what others have said here and on the forum. Whilst there are a few nice features, like the comment window and the way the summary stays at the top of the window when scrolling, the general look is just too "white". I'm ready to be persuaded otherwise, and interested to see how it looks with our own custom fields, workflow actions etc. but on what I see here, I won't be upgrading unless I can opt out of the new theme.
          Hide
          G B added a comment -

          As a workaround you can use View->Printable, which is much more readable.

          Show
          G B added a comment - As a workaround you can use View->Printable, which is much more readable.
          Hide
          Matt Doar (ServiceRocket) added a comment -

          Edwin, here's my brief feedback:

          1. Emphasize the word "Details" much more and use a darker border around that section. My reasoning is that helps focus on what is central to an issue.

          2. Make the titles of the other sections stand out more, possibly make the horizontal lines after them thicker and darker too.

          At the moment, the impression is one of a lot of "gray signposts" where I have to make more effort to navigate the View Issue page.

          ~Matt

          Show
          Matt Doar (ServiceRocket) added a comment - Edwin, here's my brief feedback: 1. Emphasize the word "Details" much more and use a darker border around that section. My reasoning is that helps focus on what is central to an issue. 2. Make the titles of the other sections stand out more, possibly make the horizontal lines after them thicker and darker too. At the moment, the impression is one of a lot of "gray signposts" where I have to make more effort to navigate the View Issue page. ~Matt
          Hide
          Brett Ryan added a comment -

          Guys and gals, less negativity and suggestions on improvements might be a better choice.

          Personally I welcome the change, though I do agree it needs a little tweaking.

          • I'm visually impaired with little pheripherial vision, make sure tht all new changes are "accessible"
            • Ensure that the view is acceptable for all window sizes (small and large). I use a window size of around 900x700 and it get's a little squishy and have to now use 1000x700 instead.
            • If you're "Commenting" and your comment gets large, in a small screen size like mine the comment entry keeps expanding to almost fill the screen.
          • The more actions you can put on the top "Tool-bar" the better, this should allow for plugins to extend into the "More Actions" function or (possibly) create a button of their own. This should be the only place where all actions can be found (workflow, attachments, voting).
          • Make the "View" button part of the same button set, means you only need to look in one section for your actions.
          • Move some of the details to a section in the right and have only "Description" remain in the "Details" section, this will allow for each property to be position underneath each other (similar to in 4.0). Remember, reading down is easier than reading left to right for properties and values.
            • Type
            • Priority
            • Status
            • Affects version
            • Fix Version
            • Components
            • Labels
          • Allow "Sections" to be collapsed, you can collapse individual comments, but you can't collapse the "Attachments" section for example.
            • I'd actually investigate moving the attachments to the right also.
          • On the right size, if a property needs to wrap, make it start on a line underneath the property name, I find it difficult reading a time component when it's wrapping over two lines.

          I know the list is long. I want you to know I'm all for the changes, but I think it could be improved. The biggest point I want heard is that it's not as "accessible" and there's now a lot more white space on screen that could be avoided with some of these suggestions.

          Show
          Brett Ryan added a comment - Guys and gals, less negativity and suggestions on improvements might be a better choice. Personally I welcome the change, though I do agree it needs a little tweaking. I'm visually impaired with little pheripherial vision, make sure tht all new changes are "accessible" Ensure that the view is acceptable for all window sizes (small and large). I use a window size of around 900x700 and it get's a little squishy and have to now use 1000x700 instead. If you're "Commenting" and your comment gets large, in a small screen size like mine the comment entry keeps expanding to almost fill the screen. The more actions you can put on the top "Tool-bar" the better, this should allow for plugins to extend into the "More Actions" function or (possibly) create a button of their own. This should be the only place where all actions can be found (workflow, attachments, voting). Make the "View" button part of the same button set, means you only need to look in one section for your actions. Move some of the details to a section in the right and have only "Description" remain in the "Details" section, this will allow for each property to be position underneath each other (similar to in 4.0). Remember, reading down is easier than reading left to right for properties and values. Type Priority Status Affects version Fix Version Components Labels Allow "Sections" to be collapsed, you can collapse individual comments, but you can't collapse the "Attachments" section for example. I'd actually investigate moving the attachments to the right also. On the right size, if a property needs to wrap, make it start on a line underneath the property name, I find it difficult reading a time component when it's wrapping over two lines. I know the list is long. I want you to know I'm all for the changes, but I think it could be improved. The biggest point I want heard is that it's not as "accessible" and there's now a lot more white space on screen that could be avoided with some of these suggestions.
          Hide
          Brett Ryan added a comment -

          Just found a really annoying caveat to having the menu dissappear as you scroll down the page. If you're looking issues with lots of comments like JRA-3821 and you get to the bottom, you have to scroll all the way to the top to get the links at the top of the page. This is a little annoying and encourages use of the back button.

          Show
          Brett Ryan added a comment - Just found a really annoying caveat to having the menu dissappear as you scroll down the page. If you're looking issues with lots of comments like JRA-3821 and you get to the bottom, you have to scroll all the way to the top to get the links at the top of the page. This is a little annoying and encourages use of the back button.
          Hide
          Maik Scheibler added a comment -

          We are forced to use IE6 by company rule. And the new UI fails to display all component properly (e.g. in FireFox i see the navigation arrows in the upper right corner, but not in IE).

          Show
          Maik Scheibler added a comment - We are forced to use IE6 by company rule. And the new UI fails to display all component properly (e.g. in FireFox i see the navigation arrows in the upper right corner, but not in IE).
          Hide
          Alexandre Cuva added a comment -

          I agree with the other users, I think it is a litle too early to change again the UI look, our users are not only IT persons but also alpha users and a new change in the UI look, will mean a new training to all the alpha users. For us it will be a major change as we are waiting on some import fix like the Firefox issue. And such UI change would be welcome on a Major JIRA change like 5.0.
          thanks
          Alex

          Show
          Alexandre Cuva added a comment - I agree with the other users, I think it is a litle too early to change again the UI look, our users are not only IT persons but also alpha users and a new change in the UI look, will mean a new training to all the alpha users. For us it will be a major change as we are waiting on some import fix like the Firefox issue. And such UI change would be welcome on a Major JIRA change like 5.0. thanks Alex
          Hide
          Amanda Shenon added a comment -

          One of my biggest issues with the new UI is a bit different from the other points. In 3.x anytime I clicked on a version number I was taken to the Issue Navigator, pre-filtered for that version. This was extremely useful as it was FAST and took me right to a spot where I could take ACTION on issues. Now, in 4.x those links go to a summary page that provides no actions and is generally only useful to a very casual user who wants to see "what's coming due soon". The emphasis placed on these summary views is odd to me. Much more emphasis should be placed on taking action and less on viewing graphics and summaries. Our users need to get to things quickly and that has been made harder (more clicks and confusing) with this new ui. At a minimum I'd like to be able to control where these links default to.

          Show
          Amanda Shenon added a comment - One of my biggest issues with the new UI is a bit different from the other points. In 3.x anytime I clicked on a version number I was taken to the Issue Navigator, pre-filtered for that version. This was extremely useful as it was FAST and took me right to a spot where I could take ACTION on issues. Now, in 4.x those links go to a summary page that provides no actions and is generally only useful to a very casual user who wants to see "what's coming due soon". The emphasis placed on these summary views is odd to me. Much more emphasis should be placed on taking action and less on viewing graphics and summaries. Our users need to get to things quickly and that has been made harder (more clicks and confusing) with this new ui. At a minimum I'd like to be able to control where these links default to.
          Hide
          Matt Hodges [Atlassian] added a comment -

          For those after the rationale from Atlassian behind the UI changes please see Edwin's comment on the JIRA Forum.

          Show
          Matt Hodges [Atlassian] added a comment - For those after the rationale from Atlassian behind the UI changes please see Edwin's comment on the JIRA Forum.
          Hide
          Qualcomm Support added a comment -

          Forgive me but his rational makes no sense. You can change the page rendering implementation without screwing up the entire L&F. The old UI could have been kept with the new implementation. Small L&F improvements could have been made separately. To say that there has been positive and negative feedback on the change ignores the overwhelming negative nature of the feedback. Don't roll this out.

          Show
          Qualcomm Support added a comment - Forgive me but his rational makes no sense. You can change the page rendering implementation without screwing up the entire L&F. The old UI could have been kept with the new implementation. Small L&F improvements could have been made separately. To say that there has been positive and negative feedback on the change ignores the overwhelming negative nature of the feedback. Don't roll this out.
          Hide
          Mike Curwen added a comment - - edited

          ditto.

          That you've made huge improvements to the back-end plumbing doesn't mean you necessarily had to switch the hot and cold taps to the front of the sink, swapping their left and right positions, and causing the water faucet to first spray the water up and fountain down into the sink.

          L & F ought to have nothing AT ALL to do with the back-end. What's zen garden all about, if not using CSS to completely reposition elements and make the exact same HTML output appear stupendously, gloriously different? (I know, I know - it's not just about a simple read-only page like Zen Garden). But, now that you've done all this backend work on the UI, and now that JIRA's UI is entirely <divs> and no more tables, saying that you simultaneoulsy couldn't "save" the old layout, seems specious.

          This statement from the linked forum:
          > I heard a recommendation for allowing a switch back to the "classic" mode. Unfortunately,
          > the changes in our presentation layer code makes this option unfeasible.

          Seems, on the face of it, false. What could you possibly have done, that could cause you to no longer display things down a left-hand column, and have grey backgrounds behind darker field names, lighter text for the values of those fields, and way way WAY less white space?

          You've done it wrong, I can't help but think.

          Show
          Mike Curwen added a comment - - edited ditto. That you've made huge improvements to the back-end plumbing doesn't mean you necessarily had to switch the hot and cold taps to the front of the sink, swapping their left and right positions, and causing the water faucet to first spray the water up and fountain down into the sink. L & F ought to have nothing AT ALL to do with the back-end. What's zen garden all about, if not using CSS to completely reposition elements and make the exact same HTML output appear stupendously, gloriously different? (I know, I know - it's not just about a simple read-only page like Zen Garden). But, now that you've done all this backend work on the UI, and now that JIRA's UI is entirely <divs> and no more tables, saying that you simultaneoulsy couldn't "save" the old layout, seems specious. This statement from the linked forum: > I heard a recommendation for allowing a switch back to the "classic" mode. Unfortunately, > the changes in our presentation layer code makes this option unfeasible. Seems, on the face of it, false. What could you possibly have done, that could cause you to no longer display things down a left-hand column, and have grey backgrounds behind darker field names, lighter text for the values of those fields, and way way WAY less white space? You've done it wrong , I can't help but think.
          Hide
          Brett Ryan added a comment -

          I'm a newcomer to JIRA, still in our first month. Closely watching the changes in JIRA is having an impact on our decision to purchase a full unlimited site license.

          Here's a question, how hard/easy is it to write my own CSS? Does JIRA allow a "Theme" framework further than the "you can change the colours and icon" in the configuration screen? If all your classes are documented, in theory we could all do (and share) whatever we want, right?

          Show
          Brett Ryan added a comment - I'm a newcomer to JIRA, still in our first month. Closely watching the changes in JIRA is having an impact on our decision to purchase a full unlimited site license. Here's a question, how hard/easy is it to write my own CSS? Does JIRA allow a "Theme" framework further than the "you can change the colours and icon" in the configuration screen? If all your classes are documented, in theory we could all do (and share) whatever we want, right?
          Hide
          Markus Krieg added a comment - - edited

          I agree with the other comments - please do not change the UI in a minor update. it's bad enough that I have to check if my changes to the issue details section and operations are still working in 4.1. let alone that custom plugins with portlets/gadgets might not work any longer. we based all of or evaluation and usability tests on 4.0, presented the UI in meetings, and are just about to rollout and create help and training.

          Show
          Markus Krieg added a comment - - edited I agree with the other comments - please do not change the UI in a minor update. it's bad enough that I have to check if my changes to the issue details section and operations are still working in 4.1. let alone that custom plugins with portlets/gadgets might not work any longer. we based all of or evaluation and usability tests on 4.0, presented the UI in meetings, and are just about to rollout and create help and training.
          Hide
          Kay Abendroth added a comment - - edited

          For those after the rationale from Atlassian behind the UI changes please see Edwin's comment on the JIRA Forum.

          I'm really not interested in what the rationale behind the UI changes is. And knowing that wouldn't help me either. It also doesn't solve the problem. On the other side I'm pretty sure there are some good intentations behind it.

          Forcing an UI change of that size in a point release is not professional and will disappoint customers, as reading some of the comments here and the forum posts show.

          What I think would be appropriate for 4.1:

          1. Make the new and experimental UI a choice.
          2. Implement the left-hand panel of the current version as a floating element that scrolls with the page.
          Show
          Kay Abendroth added a comment - - edited For those after the rationale from Atlassian behind the UI changes please see Edwin's comment on the JIRA Forum. I'm really not interested in what the rationale behind the UI changes is. And knowing that wouldn't help me either. It also doesn't solve the problem. On the other side I'm pretty sure there are some good intentations behind it. Forcing an UI change of that size in a point release is not professional and will disappoint customers, as reading some of the comments here and the forum posts show. What I think would be appropriate for 4.1: Make the new and experimental UI a choice. Implement the left-hand panel of the current version as a floating element that scrolls with the page.
          Hide
          Chris Cralle added a comment -

          It will be extremely upsetting if this is forced upon us. We just purchased a 50 User Standalone based on an extensive 2 month eval of 4.0
          We are just over 1 month into live use and now this!! OMFG...
          My boss is going to kill me, the user are going to hang me, and then I'll jump out a window myself if there's anything left.
          I don't like this at all. I also don't agree with Edwin's assessment. It's just damn sad that we'll be forced to go with this to get any bug fixes and enhancements. Of which many are very much needed.

          Will the UI allow me to rename users now?

          Show
          Chris Cralle added a comment - It will be extremely upsetting if this is forced upon us. We just purchased a 50 User Standalone based on an extensive 2 month eval of 4.0 We are just over 1 month into live use and now this!! OMFG... My boss is going to kill me, the user are going to hang me, and then I'll jump out a window myself if there's anything left. I don't like this at all. I also don't agree with Edwin's assessment. It's just damn sad that we'll be forced to go with this to get any bug fixes and enhancements. Of which many are very much needed. Will the UI allow me to rename users now?
          Hide
          Robert Sfeir added a comment -

          As I take a look at this UI, I'm surprised that such big changes were OK'd for a point release. There are some good things about it which take some time getting used to, others are just plain bad design. The good: I like the fact that I can comment while I scroll through the ticket and details, look at other comments etc... I think that works. Beyond that, I think there's some iffy things, for example: The label colors for the sections is way too dang light. Anyone try to look at this on a MacBook Pro screen (or any laptop) it's so faded that I have to tilt the screen down to see where it is. Second I think the type is too big, we're not blind. The more actions drop down is useful for certain things, but burying the create sub task in there is not good. The other thing that's not good is that as you type a comment, this box gets bigger, look what happens to the ticket... (I attached a screen shot) I love the top half of the issue and there's no way for me to see it until I hit the add button. Bad design. It's one thing to put glitz in, it's a whole other thing to sacrifice usability. For the votes and watchers... ok nice to have a check mark, but to remove the votes I had to guess that because it had a - on the check mark that's where I needed to click it. Getting cutesey with icons is not a good idea.

          In the end I think users will get used to it, but from a corporate point of view you're not taking into consideration that the corporate world likes to see things stable for a while. Point releases are meant for minor features, some major but not too many, and certainly a lot of usability improvements and bug fixes. Changing a whole UI is not a usability improvement, it's a change in how the application works, how your users interact with it, and that big a change should either be reserved for a major release, or at least made as a complete option.

          (Oh neat and I can't click attach file while my comment is on the screen, I have to first submit it and then attach the file... come on guys)

          Show
          Robert Sfeir added a comment - As I take a look at this UI, I'm surprised that such big changes were OK'd for a point release. There are some good things about it which take some time getting used to, others are just plain bad design. The good: I like the fact that I can comment while I scroll through the ticket and details, look at other comments etc... I think that works. Beyond that, I think there's some iffy things, for example: The label colors for the sections is way too dang light. Anyone try to look at this on a MacBook Pro screen (or any laptop) it's so faded that I have to tilt the screen down to see where it is. Second I think the type is too big, we're not blind. The more actions drop down is useful for certain things, but burying the create sub task in there is not good. The other thing that's not good is that as you type a comment, this box gets bigger, look what happens to the ticket... (I attached a screen shot) I love the top half of the issue and there's no way for me to see it until I hit the add button. Bad design. It's one thing to put glitz in, it's a whole other thing to sacrifice usability. For the votes and watchers... ok nice to have a check mark, but to remove the votes I had to guess that because it had a - on the check mark that's where I needed to click it. Getting cutesey with icons is not a good idea. In the end I think users will get used to it, but from a corporate point of view you're not taking into consideration that the corporate world likes to see things stable for a while. Point releases are meant for minor features, some major but not too many, and certainly a lot of usability improvements and bug fixes. Changing a whole UI is not a usability improvement, it's a change in how the application works, how your users interact with it, and that big a change should either be reserved for a major release, or at least made as a complete option. (Oh neat and I can't click attach file while my comment is on the screen, I have to first submit it and then attach the file... come on guys)
          Hide
          Robert Sfeir added a comment -

          where's the top part of my ticket?

          Show
          Robert Sfeir added a comment - where's the top part of my ticket?
          Hide
          Neal Applebaum added a comment - - edited

          I've been laying back watching all this, but I have to agree with everyone. Using IE6 I couldn't even read this issue. You know, like Ann Landers used to say "If it ain't broke, don't fix it". Well, at least they haven't caught up to screw up the layout of the e-mail notification yet

          Atlassian, there are loyal users who have been waiting up to 8 years for something as simple as a local timezone display, so it is quite disheartening to see so may countless hours being spent on something nobody wanted and nobody wants. I didn't think this was Scott and Mike's vision for Atlassian.

          Yeah - it's so cool to have scrollable frames and cool dropdowns and movable gadgets and all, but the reason JIRA was successful is because it was clean, straightforward, easy to learn and use, and simply got the job done. Users are not programmers, and they aren't wowed by what can be done with browsers. They only point out what's bad. They don't rave or care about what's cool.

          Unfortunately, it looks like it's too late. They aren't listening.

          Even as I type this comment, I find a bug. I can't see the issue I'm commenting on because the comment field has extended so far down that the scrollable frame doesn't work.

          And for me, it's too late. I first started using version 3.0.3 in 2004. So that's a long time. But my JIRA experience ends at 3.13. It was a good run, but the application is no longer usable, not for internal use or especially customers.

          Show
          Neal Applebaum added a comment - - edited I've been laying back watching all this, but I have to agree with everyone. Using IE6 I couldn't even read this issue. You know, like Ann Landers used to say "If it ain't broke, don't fix it". Well, at least they haven't caught up to screw up the layout of the e-mail notification yet Atlassian, there are loyal users who have been waiting up to 8 years for something as simple as a local timezone display, so it is quite disheartening to see so may countless hours being spent on something nobody wanted and nobody wants. I didn't think this was Scott and Mike's vision for Atlassian. Yeah - it's so cool to have scrollable frames and cool dropdowns and movable gadgets and all, but the reason JIRA was successful is because it was clean, straightforward, easy to learn and use, and simply got the job done. Users are not programmers, and they aren't wowed by what can be done with browsers. They only point out what's bad. They don't rave or care about what's cool. Unfortunately, it looks like it's too late. They aren't listening. Even as I type this comment, I find a bug. I can't see the issue I'm commenting on because the comment field has extended so far down that the scrollable frame doesn't work. And for me, it's too late. I first started using version 3.0.3 in 2004. So that's a long time. But my JIRA experience ends at 3.13. It was a good run, but the application is no longer usable, not for internal use or especially customers.
          Hide
          Edwin Wong [Atlassian] added a comment -

          Hi guys,

          Lots of comments here, which is great.

          I've also continued our discussions on the forum post: http://forums.atlassian.com/thread.jspa?messageID=257336729&#257336729

          But to answer some of you individually here:

          Nicolas,

          Loss of clarity on actions and operations - "Stuff I can do to this issue" should never be drawn to look like tabs, and although I know they're really buttons, they really look like tabs. This is totally cosmetic - drawing them in a different style would probably solve it, but I've already had "I can't see what I can actually DO here" three times.

          Agreed. We are looking into this.

          I'm not sure about the location and grouping of the workflow and actions (although the drop-down "more actions" is good if you really must go this way). Problem - I don't know how to improve it.

          This is something we are looking at closely. One of the ideas we are toying around with in the future is to make this whole thing customizable. We have also allowed the workflow transition order and number of workflow transitions showing up along the top to be configurable.

          Complete failure on comments - when making a comment, the box expands to cover bits of the main issue. This is not acceptable - people need the whole issue on-screen (notwithstanding long scroll bars if the page is long) so that they can refer back to it when commenting.

          We agree this is going to be an issue for longer comments. We're looking at ways we can fix this.

          Matt,

          1. Emphasize the word "Details" much more and use a darker border around that section. My reasoning is that helps focus on what is central to an issue.

          We are changing the coloring of the block headings to be darker and trying to clean up the layout of the details block more. Hopefully, this can improve the focus.

          2. Make the titles of the other sections stand out more, possibly make the horizontal lines after them thicker and darker too.

          That's also coming soon.

          Brett,

          Guys and gals, less negativity and suggestions on improvements might be a better choice.

          Thanks Brett. We really do appreciate actionable specific feedback items.

          Ensure that the view is acceptable for all window sizes (small and large). I use a window size of around 900x700 and it get's a little squishy and have to now use 1000x700 instead.

          We typically design for optimal viewing at a minimum of 1024 * 768. So it would be really a bit squishy if you go below that. Having said that, have you tried turning down the font size a pinch with the browser? Does that help?

          If you're "Commenting" and your comment gets large, in a small screen size like mine the comment entry keeps expanding to almost fill the screen.

          Agreed, see above.

          Allow "Sections" to be collapsed, you can collapse individual comments, but you can't collapse the "Attachments" section for example.

          Good suggestion. We have plans to do this already, we are just not there yet.

          Here's a question, how hard/easy is it to write my own CSS? Does JIRA allow a "Theme" framework further than the "you can change the colours and icon" in the configuration screen? If all your classes are documented, in theory we could all do (and share) whatever we want, right?

          One of the things that we have done in JIRA 4.1 is to significantly clean up the markup of the view issue page so that you can indeed change the css more easily. Take a look at relphie's suggestion for an example: http://forums.atlassian.com/thread.jspa?threadID=42179&start=15&tstart=0, although we are also making some changes in the product to strengthen the section heading colors.

          Cheers,
          Edwin

          Show
          Edwin Wong [Atlassian] added a comment - Hi guys, Lots of comments here, which is great. I've also continued our discussions on the forum post: http://forums.atlassian.com/thread.jspa?messageID=257336729&#257336729 But to answer some of you individually here: Nicolas , Loss of clarity on actions and operations - "Stuff I can do to this issue" should never be drawn to look like tabs, and although I know they're really buttons, they really look like tabs. This is totally cosmetic - drawing them in a different style would probably solve it, but I've already had "I can't see what I can actually DO here" three times. Agreed. We are looking into this. I'm not sure about the location and grouping of the workflow and actions (although the drop-down "more actions" is good if you really must go this way). Problem - I don't know how to improve it. This is something we are looking at closely. One of the ideas we are toying around with in the future is to make this whole thing customizable. We have also allowed the workflow transition order and number of workflow transitions showing up along the top to be configurable. Complete failure on comments - when making a comment, the box expands to cover bits of the main issue. This is not acceptable - people need the whole issue on-screen (notwithstanding long scroll bars if the page is long) so that they can refer back to it when commenting. We agree this is going to be an issue for longer comments. We're looking at ways we can fix this. Matt , 1. Emphasize the word "Details" much more and use a darker border around that section. My reasoning is that helps focus on what is central to an issue. We are changing the coloring of the block headings to be darker and trying to clean up the layout of the details block more. Hopefully, this can improve the focus. 2. Make the titles of the other sections stand out more, possibly make the horizontal lines after them thicker and darker too. That's also coming soon. Brett , Guys and gals, less negativity and suggestions on improvements might be a better choice. Thanks Brett. We really do appreciate actionable specific feedback items. Ensure that the view is acceptable for all window sizes (small and large). I use a window size of around 900x700 and it get's a little squishy and have to now use 1000x700 instead. We typically design for optimal viewing at a minimum of 1024 * 768. So it would be really a bit squishy if you go below that. Having said that, have you tried turning down the font size a pinch with the browser? Does that help? If you're "Commenting" and your comment gets large, in a small screen size like mine the comment entry keeps expanding to almost fill the screen. Agreed, see above. Allow "Sections" to be collapsed, you can collapse individual comments, but you can't collapse the "Attachments" section for example. Good suggestion. We have plans to do this already, we are just not there yet. Here's a question, how hard/easy is it to write my own CSS? Does JIRA allow a "Theme" framework further than the "you can change the colours and icon" in the configuration screen? If all your classes are documented, in theory we could all do (and share) whatever we want, right? One of the things that we have done in JIRA 4.1 is to significantly clean up the markup of the view issue page so that you can indeed change the css more easily. Take a look at relphie's suggestion for an example: http://forums.atlassian.com/thread.jspa?threadID=42179&start=15&tstart=0 , although we are also making some changes in the product to strengthen the section heading colors. Cheers, Edwin
          Hide
          Edwin Wong [Atlassian] added a comment -

          Neal,

          I'm sorry to hear you reached this sentiment with JIRA.

          Modernizing the user interface to make it simpler and faster to use has been a long term goal for us. We embarked on this project because we have had many customers and prospects tell us that the JIRA user interface was both slow and complex. Of course, it is not perfect and there are still issues. That's why feedback in the forums and on JAC issues like this is helpful for us to improve it.

          We have approached every release with the intention to achieve some of our longer term goals as well as solving some of the existing improvements/issues/features. In our last release (4.0), for example, we delivered JQL, which at that point in time, was the most voted for feature request on the entire project in jira.atlassian.com. All in all, we satisfied some 2600 votes in the release. Even with JIRA 4.1, where so much focus has been on the UX, we have devoted attention to other features too, like customizable email subjects. We have satisfied some 650 votes by rough count.

          The whole Atlassian team, including Mike and Scott, is dedicated to continue our business and improving JIRA as the best issue tracking system around. Of course, we would like to be able to do everything, including things like timezone support. Unfortunately, the reality of business is that we cannot satisfy all our competing demands and customers immediately and we must prioritize.

          Cheers,
          Edwin

          Show
          Edwin Wong [Atlassian] added a comment - Neal, I'm sorry to hear you reached this sentiment with JIRA. Modernizing the user interface to make it simpler and faster to use has been a long term goal for us. We embarked on this project because we have had many customers and prospects tell us that the JIRA user interface was both slow and complex. Of course, it is not perfect and there are still issues. That's why feedback in the forums and on JAC issues like this is helpful for us to improve it. We have approached every release with the intention to achieve some of our longer term goals as well as solving some of the existing improvements/issues/features. In our last release (4.0), for example, we delivered JQL, which at that point in time, was the most voted for feature request on the entire project in jira.atlassian.com. All in all, we satisfied some 2600 votes in the release. Even with JIRA 4.1, where so much focus has been on the UX, we have devoted attention to other features too, like customizable email subjects. We have satisfied some 650 votes by rough count. The whole Atlassian team, including Mike and Scott, is dedicated to continue our business and improving JIRA as the best issue tracking system around. Of course, we would like to be able to do everything, including things like timezone support. Unfortunately, the reality of business is that we cannot satisfy all our competing demands and customers immediately and we must prioritize. Cheers, Edwin
          Hide
          Shannon Krebs added a comment -
          Allow "Sections" to be collapsed, you can collapse individual comments, but you can't collapse the "Attachments" section for example.

          Good suggestion. We have plans to do this already, we are just not there yet.

          This seems to be possible in the current rc release by double clicking on the divider line. That leads to another problem though as there is no visual indication that a section is collapsed.

          Show
          Shannon Krebs added a comment - Allow "Sections" to be collapsed, you can collapse individual comments, but you can't collapse the "Attachments" section for example. Good suggestion. We have plans to do this already, we are just not there yet. This seems to be possible in the current rc release by double clicking on the divider line. That leads to another problem though as there is no visual indication that a section is collapsed.
          Hide
          Edwin Wong [Atlassian] added a comment -

          Shannon,

          Great pickup . Unfortunately though, we started experimenting with feature but there are still many issues with it. So it will not make the final cut.

          Cheers,
          Edwin

          Show
          Edwin Wong [Atlassian] added a comment - Shannon, Great pickup . Unfortunately though, we started experimenting with feature but there are still many issues with it. So it will not make the final cut. Cheers, Edwin
          Hide
          Brett Ryan added a comment -

          @Edwin, this is great news. I accept and understand the UI changes and support them, as long as our feedback is being heard and appropriate changes made then I'm happy with that.

          About my screen settings... My eyes have been F***ed since birth! I have barely any pheripherial vision, can only see with one eye, am short sighted, and; can't see small text, I sit with my face < 10" away from the screen. A smaller window size makes it easy for me to see everything without having to constantly move my head to read while "standard" sized fonts are okay for me to see. Maybe if you could "collapse" the section on the right that would be enough. I'm getting used to the larger window size so it's not a huge biggie. I would encourage to support smaller window sizes but I won't hold it against you

          For those that are complaining about broken IE6, I say that so it should be. IE6 is now approaching 9 years old, for a company to still have to support something so old is insane, The confluence system requirements state that it is intended for platforms to only be supported for (at least) two years. Personally, I'd be looking at deprecating IE7 too, it's > 4 y/o. It's bad enough that IE6 existed in the first place let alone people wanting it still supported. Hell, does anyone support Fx 1.0 (late 2004)? IE6 is holding the web back, let's cut that ball and chain.

          Our rule of thumb when releasing a new version of Confluence is that we will officially support platforms that have been released within the last one to two years (or the latest version of that platform if no new version of it was released in that period).
                  Confluence System Requirements

          Show
          Brett Ryan added a comment - @Edwin, this is great news. I accept and understand the UI changes and support them, as long as our feedback is being heard and appropriate changes made then I'm happy with that. About my screen settings... My eyes have been F***ed since birth! I have barely any pheripherial vision, can only see with one eye, am short sighted, and; can't see small text, I sit with my face < 10" away from the screen. A smaller window size makes it easy for me to see everything without having to constantly move my head to read while "standard" sized fonts are okay for me to see. Maybe if you could "collapse" the section on the right that would be enough. I'm getting used to the larger window size so it's not a huge biggie. I would encourage to support smaller window sizes but I won't hold it against you For those that are complaining about broken IE6, I say that so it should be. IE6 is now approaching 9 years old, for a company to still have to support something so old is insane, The confluence system requirements state that it is intended for platforms to only be supported for (at least) two years. Personally, I'd be looking at deprecating IE7 too, it's > 4 y/o. It's bad enough that IE6 existed in the first place let alone people wanting it still supported. Hell, does anyone support Fx 1.0 (late 2004)? IE6 is holding the web back, let's cut that ball and chain. Our rule of thumb when releasing a new version of Confluence is that we will officially support platforms that have been released within the last one to two years (or the latest version of that platform if no new version of it was released in that period).         Confluence System Requirements
          Hide
          Brett Ryan added a comment -

          @Shannon - How the hell did you figure that out? lol.

          @Edwin - Pooper, would be nice to collapse and have the issue navigator remember your preference for opening other issues.

          Show
          Brett Ryan added a comment - @Shannon - How the hell did you figure that out? lol. @Edwin - Pooper, would be nice to collapse and have the issue navigator remember your preference for opening other issues.
          Hide
          Brett Ryan added a comment -

          btw, just to add to my support of not supporting IE6, Confluence 3.3 will not support it.

          Show
          Brett Ryan added a comment - btw, just to add to my support of not supporting IE6, Confluence 3.3 will not support it.
          Hide
          Nick Menere [Atlassian] added a comment - - edited

          Hi guys,

          Nick here. I'm the lead developer for JIRA's User Interface redesign and thought I might chime in as to why Classic Mode is a challenge from a technical perspective.

          When we started the JIRA UX project one of the first things we did was to brainstorm ideas that would take the JIRA user experience to the next level. We took a lot of inspiration from online email apps, online document editing apps and some other personal favourites. When we started looking at what was blocking us implementing some of the ideas, we quickly realised that 8 year old View Issue page was not going to be able to cope with what we had planed. The main issues were around the Look and Feel, the markup and the way the code was generated. All 3 were going to need to be addressed in order for JIRA to move forward.

          Classic mode was always going to be hard to keep as the way the content is produced on the server side means that a lot of components would need to be duplicated or contain twice as much view logic. For each new feature that we wanted to also include in the Classic interface, it would require twice as much front end coding and twice as much QA. This would massively slow down the rate at which we could deliver new features.

          If we maintained a classic mode, it would not be able to take advantage of the new features we are planning in the coming year and would soon become a far inferior interface into the issue. It also would not be able to take advantage of the work being put in AUI (Atlassian's User Interface library that all products use).

          We are also undergoing a big effort to standardize the UI language used across all Atlassian products. While we are a long way from our goal here, we hope to bring all products into line and give them a uniform feel. The old view issue page's style was not easily ported to other applications or even other areas within JIRA. The new page's style can be used in a number of situations as you can see within JIRA (Browse Project, User Profile, Manage Filters, Manage Dashboards).

          Our goal in 4.1 was to produce a new base for us to build upon in future releases. This new base will enable us to develop new features quicker, enable plugins to integrate better into the page and in the future enable people to customise the page (both L&F and content).

          Cheers guys and thanks for all feedback.
          Nick
          JIRA UX Tech Lead

          Show
          Nick Menere [Atlassian] added a comment - - edited Hi guys, Nick here. I'm the lead developer for JIRA's User Interface redesign and thought I might chime in as to why Classic Mode is a challenge from a technical perspective. When we started the JIRA UX project one of the first things we did was to brainstorm ideas that would take the JIRA user experience to the next level. We took a lot of inspiration from online email apps, online document editing apps and some other personal favourites. When we started looking at what was blocking us implementing some of the ideas, we quickly realised that 8 year old View Issue page was not going to be able to cope with what we had planed. The main issues were around the Look and Feel, the markup and the way the code was generated. All 3 were going to need to be addressed in order for JIRA to move forward. Classic mode was always going to be hard to keep as the way the content is produced on the server side means that a lot of components would need to be duplicated or contain twice as much view logic. For each new feature that we wanted to also include in the Classic interface, it would require twice as much front end coding and twice as much QA. This would massively slow down the rate at which we could deliver new features. If we maintained a classic mode, it would not be able to take advantage of the new features we are planning in the coming year and would soon become a far inferior interface into the issue. It also would not be able to take advantage of the work being put in AUI (Atlassian's User Interface library that all products use). We are also undergoing a big effort to standardize the UI language used across all Atlassian products. While we are a long way from our goal here, we hope to bring all products into line and give them a uniform feel. The old view issue page's style was not easily ported to other applications or even other areas within JIRA. The new page's style can be used in a number of situations as you can see within JIRA (Browse Project, User Profile, Manage Filters, Manage Dashboards). Our goal in 4.1 was to produce a new base for us to build upon in future releases. This new base will enable us to develop new features quicker, enable plugins to integrate better into the page and in the future enable people to customise the page (both L&F and content). Cheers guys and thanks for all feedback. Nick JIRA UX Tech Lead
          Hide
          Matt Doar (ServiceRocket) added a comment -

          Nick,

          I understand about the effort required to preserve a UI while changing the underlying framework (been there) but after the new framework is in place, perhaps it will seem less like work to create themes for JIRA? Anyway, I think with the level of frustration expressed here that you're going to see a few plugins to change the appearance of the View Issue screen back to pre 4.1 appearance. If asked to by a paying client I'm even considering writing one myself that would provide:

          1. Admin, Look and Feel, Choose Default Theme - Original, Modern
          2. User Preferences, Choose Theme
          3. A webwork plugin to overwrite ViewIssue.jspa with a new class inheriting from ViewIssue.java

          On a sidenote I don't personally fancy writing a large amount of Velocity or JSP code to use the new REST API, so I might even avoid templating and create my own abstraction classes in Java to produce the required HTML. I've just seen so much complexity ending up in templating files where it really doesn't belong that it might as well be in the app's language!

          ~Matt

          Show
          Matt Doar (ServiceRocket) added a comment - Nick, I understand about the effort required to preserve a UI while changing the underlying framework (been there) but after the new framework is in place, perhaps it will seem less like work to create themes for JIRA? Anyway, I think with the level of frustration expressed here that you're going to see a few plugins to change the appearance of the View Issue screen back to pre 4.1 appearance. If asked to by a paying client I'm even considering writing one myself that would provide: 1. Admin, Look and Feel, Choose Default Theme - Original, Modern 2. User Preferences, Choose Theme 3. A webwork plugin to overwrite ViewIssue.jspa with a new class inheriting from ViewIssue.java On a sidenote I don't personally fancy writing a large amount of Velocity or JSP code to use the new REST API, so I might even avoid templating and create my own abstraction classes in Java to produce the required HTML. I've just seen so much complexity ending up in templating files where it really doesn't belong that it might as well be in the app's language! ~Matt
          Hide
          Holger Schimanski added a comment -

          I think, that with CSS styles you can do a lot here to customize the UI - especially with this new layout, where everything got proper CSS classes. I guess it should be possible to imitate the 3.13 UI at least in some parts.

          Anyway some of the new concepts e.g. moving the operations / workflow actions to the top and move some of them in a dropdown (which I both like) will not be able to customer without a bigger effort I guess.

          Show
          Holger Schimanski added a comment - I think, that with CSS styles you can do a lot here to customize the UI - especially with this new layout, where everything got proper CSS classes. I guess it should be possible to imitate the 3.13 UI at least in some parts. Anyway some of the new concepts e.g. moving the operations / workflow actions to the top and move some of them in a dropdown (which I both like) will not be able to customer without a bigger effort I guess.
          Hide
          Gili added a comment -

          +1 for some form of Themes, but only if you are unable to fix the 4.1 look to everyone's satisfaction. My main problem with the new look is that it is too white. You were probably going for a "clean" look but instead ended up with something "bland". Methinks someone needs to read http://filthyrichclients.org/ for some inspiration

          Show
          Gili added a comment - +1 for some form of Themes, but only if you are unable to fix the 4.1 look to everyone's satisfaction. My main problem with the new look is that it is too white. You were probably going for a "clean" look but instead ended up with something "bland". Methinks someone needs to read http://filthyrichclients.org/ for some inspiration
          Hide
          Jeff Kirby added a comment -

          I really really like the new look.

          Show
          Jeff Kirby added a comment - I really really like the new look.
          Hide
          Edwin Wong [Atlassian] added a comment -

          Gilli,

          We are making some changes to increase of the coloring for headings (see above comment) and the layout around the top details fields which should hopefully alleviate some of the "too white" issues.

          Cheers,
          Edwin

          Show
          Edwin Wong [Atlassian] added a comment - Gilli, We are making some changes to increase of the coloring for headings (see above comment) and the layout around the top details fields which should hopefully alleviate some of the "too white" issues. Cheers, Edwin
          Hide
          Vincent Eggen added a comment -

          Hi,

          As a old Jira user (3.0.x), I've always welcome every new Jira release and usually sponsor every upgrades towards our users. This one will be the first one I won't.

          Most of the users are browsing a lot of issues every day. It's maybe not obvious for the Atlassian's Product managers, but the ability to see key data in one single step, and go from one issue to another without the burden of scrolling and clicking every time is key for typical users.
          The amount of information visible by page in one screen without having to scroll down has been reduce by 50% with this new layout.
          I believe that the users productivity is de facto reduced in a similar proportion.

          I wish good luck to all the Jira admin that will have to "sell" this upgrade to their users...Mine are simply not happy and don't see the benefits around this change. I clearly have to cope with their feedback...

          Please give us the choice.

          Show
          Vincent Eggen added a comment - Hi, As a old Jira user (3.0.x), I've always welcome every new Jira release and usually sponsor every upgrades towards our users. This one will be the first one I won't. Most of the users are browsing a lot of issues every day. It's maybe not obvious for the Atlassian's Product managers, but the ability to see key data in one single step, and go from one issue to another without the burden of scrolling and clicking every time is key for typical users. The amount of information visible by page in one screen without having to scroll down has been reduce by 50% with this new layout. I believe that the users productivity is de facto reduced in a similar proportion. I wish good luck to all the Jira admin that will have to "sell" this upgrade to their users...Mine are simply not happy and don't see the benefits around this change. I clearly have to cope with their feedback... Please give us the choice.
          Hide
          Jositz, Michael (Allianz SE) added a comment -

          What's going on here? Now 4.1 is released with the new UI. You changed it in a minor release 4.1, not e.g. in JIRA 5.0. I never expected such a huge change in a minor release. It is the most important screen in JIRA!

          In my personal opinion I feel like the user concerns (adressed by the amount of watcherd & voters) are completely ignored by Atlassian.

          Show
          Jositz, Michael (Allianz SE) added a comment - What's going on here? Now 4.1 is released with the new UI. You changed it in a minor release 4.1, not e.g. in JIRA 5.0. I never expected such a huge change in a minor release. It is the most important screen in JIRA! In my personal opinion I feel like the user concerns (adressed by the amount of watcherd & voters) are completely ignored by Atlassian.
          Hide
          Mark Moskovitz added a comment -

          I agree with the past comment that information has moved around such that it may reduce productivity. Please put the important information (what was on the left side in the old view) "above the fold" so it doesn't require folding.

          I'm also curious how the screen setup is done now, as things are moved around quite a bit. Looking forward this being in a future update, at least 4.5 or 5.0, and not 4.1.

          Show
          Mark Moskovitz added a comment - I agree with the past comment that information has moved around such that it may reduce productivity. Please put the important information (what was on the left side in the old view) "above the fold" so it doesn't require folding. I'm also curious how the screen setup is done now, as things are moved around quite a bit. Looking forward this being in a future update, at least 4.5 or 5.0, and not 4.1.
          Hide
          Andreas Wachowski added a comment -

          I agree with the comments above that favor a choice and are, shall we say, surprised by such a radical change in a point release. Although we definitely could make use of the component and version bulk-change feature, we will for the time being not upgrade because we expect a high training and communication overhead to introduce this release (we are talking about approx. 300 users).

          Show
          Andreas Wachowski added a comment - I agree with the comments above that favor a choice and are, shall we say, surprised by such a radical change in a point release. Although we definitely could make use of the component and version bulk-change feature, we will for the time being not upgrade because we expect a high training and communication overhead to introduce this release (we are talking about approx. 300 users).
          Hide
          Frank Nagel added a comment -

          Absolutely perfectly! Developers decide what users have to use. To pull up the new features as a reason for future possibilities, is weak.The new issue-view should be available optionally. This would be a clear advancement.

          Show
          Frank Nagel added a comment - Absolutely perfectly! Developers decide what users have to use. To pull up the new features as a reason for future possibilities, is weak.The new issue-view should be available optionally . This would be a clear advancement.
          Hide
          Eduardo Domínguez added a comment -

          Adding keyboard shortcuts to the most common actions every body used to do will be great:

          • Create
          • Modify:
            • Comment: already made with 'm'
            • Assign
            • Edit
            • Resolve
          • Close

          The screen looks cleaner (may be too clean) but being the comments on the left makes me turn my head to the left, so expending a couple of hours looking incidents and doing other things (mails, reports...) where I can configure some menus and options on the left is not natural for me (this is worst in +22" 16:9 monitors).

          Show
          Eduardo Domínguez added a comment - Adding keyboard shortcuts to the most common actions every body used to do will be great: Create Modify: Comment: already made with 'm' Assign Edit Resolve Close The screen looks cleaner (may be too clean) but being the comments on the left makes me turn my head to the left, so expending a couple of hours looking incidents and doing other things (mails, reports...) where I can configure some menus and options on the left is not natural for me (this is worst in +22" 16:9 monitors).
          Hide
          Brian Hill added a comment -

          I can understand what Atlassian are trying to do, and thank Nick, Edwin for their posts to explain the underlying reasons. However, when you're dealing with a multi-instance client site, lots of documentation to date and having to sort through through the impact analysis of a major UI change, the approach of bundling a major UI change in a minor release is disappointing. Tibor Hegyi's post to remind Atlassian of your core value to "Don't #@!% the Customer" is spot on. Please think about the impacts of such a change approach for your more complex installation sites. +1 from me on getting this to be a configurable option, will watch with interest to see how this issue is handled. Abstraction of L&F shouldn't be as hard as you're making it. I'm siding with Vincent, Michael, Andreas, Matt Doar, Neal, Kay, Markus, Mike, Qualcomm and Robert.

          Show
          Brian Hill added a comment - I can understand what Atlassian are trying to do, and thank Nick, Edwin for their posts to explain the underlying reasons. However, when you're dealing with a multi-instance client site, lots of documentation to date and having to sort through through the impact analysis of a major UI change, the approach of bundling a major UI change in a minor release is disappointing. Tibor Hegyi's post to remind Atlassian of your core value to "Don't #@!% the Customer" is spot on. Please think about the impacts of such a change approach for your more complex installation sites. +1 from me on getting this to be a configurable option, will watch with interest to see how this issue is handled. Abstraction of L&F shouldn't be as hard as you're making it. I'm siding with Vincent, Michael, Andreas, Matt Doar, Neal, Kay, Markus, Mike, Qualcomm and Robert.
          Hide
          Alex Holtz added a comment -

          For what it's worth my organization has recently decided our next upgrade will take us to 4.0.4 rather than 4.1. Portions of the new UI are nice, but after a brief internal usability study the feedback we received is that the UI changes will be too disruptive.

          We look forward to additional iterations on this UI and hope a future version of Jira will restore the feel of working with a simple, intuitive interface.

          Show
          Alex Holtz added a comment - For what it's worth my organization has recently decided our next upgrade will take us to 4.0.4 rather than 4.1. Portions of the new UI are nice, but after a brief internal usability study the feedback we received is that the UI changes will be too disruptive. We look forward to additional iterations on this UI and hope a future version of Jira will restore the feel of working with a simple, intuitive interface.
          Hide
          Mark Liedtke added a comment -

          I wanted to add my 2 cents to this bug as someone who prefers the new 4.1 UI. My company is in the process of upgrading from 3.13 to 4.1. Our project started prior to the 4.1 release, and when I initially saw the new 4.1 UI I was immediately turned off, and considered it a show-stopper for a 4.1 upgrade. I decided to test it out on a dev machine, and now after a week of tinkering with it in a my dev environment with a copy of our production data, and comparing it with our production 3.13 instance, I'm a big fan of the new UI. I will admit it took some getting used to.

          This is kind of a New Coke vs. Coke Classic debate...I guess I'm just one of the guys who likes New JIRA. I'm keeping my vote because I believe JIRA Classic would be a nice option.

          Show
          Mark Liedtke added a comment - I wanted to add my 2 cents to this bug as someone who prefers the new 4.1 UI. My company is in the process of upgrading from 3.13 to 4.1. Our project started prior to the 4.1 release, and when I initially saw the new 4.1 UI I was immediately turned off, and considered it a show-stopper for a 4.1 upgrade. I decided to test it out on a dev machine, and now after a week of tinkering with it in a my dev environment with a copy of our production data, and comparing it with our production 3.13 instance, I'm a big fan of the new UI. I will admit it took some getting used to. This is kind of a New Coke vs. Coke Classic debate...I guess I'm just one of the guys who likes New JIRA. I'm keeping my vote because I believe JIRA Classic would be a nice option.
          Hide
          Brett Ryan added a comment -

          I agree with Mark Liedtke, I think a lot of people are making it sound worse than it is.

          The fact that (by default) only two transitions are shown is a good thing, it means you can present the top two transitions you want users executing which you can control through the order of your transitions.

          There are some usability improvements that can be applied such as moving properties to the righ, allowing sections to be collapsed and allowing for smaller screen sizes as I suggested earlier.

          Show
          Brett Ryan added a comment - I agree with Mark Liedtke, I think a lot of people are making it sound worse than it is. The fact that (by default) only two transitions are shown is a good thing, it means you can present the top two transitions you want users executing which you can control through the order of your transitions. There are some usability improvements that can be applied such as moving properties to the righ, allowing sections to be collapsed and allowing for smaller screen sizes as I suggested earlier.
          Hide
          Patrick Coleman added a comment -

          FWIW, we upgraded from 4.0.1 to 4.1 last week and there were a few user comments about the new UI but all in all the world didn't end. For reference, we've been using Jira for 3+ years so our eyeballs are pretty burned in with the old UI.

          One consistent feedback is that the issue view screen is too stark. Some light background coloring of the different logical areas would help break up some of the vast areas of whiteness. Also, the font in the edit fields needs to be changed.

          Show
          Patrick Coleman added a comment - FWIW, we upgraded from 4.0.1 to 4.1 last week and there were a few user comments about the new UI but all in all the world didn't end. For reference, we've been using Jira for 3+ years so our eyeballs are pretty burned in with the old UI. One consistent feedback is that the issue view screen is too stark. Some light background coloring of the different logical areas would help break up some of the vast areas of whiteness. Also, the font in the edit fields needs to be changed.
          Hide
          Erik G. added a comment -

          I am not a big fan of the change. There is a reason why the left-hand sidebar is a good UI metaphor, especially for frequently used options. I now have to click twice to do things. I'm also extra irritated because I ended up moving to 4.1 because of the security hole in 4.0 and surprise, everything changed...

          I agree with most of the comments – this is a major regression in terms of usability. You should have factored in a classic mode. The fact that its "technically hard" does not cut it as an excuse.

          I think a number of the suggestions are quite pragmatic and should be put in place as soon as possible. You could probably make a lot of us much happier if you did a couple of simple things:

          • make it optional to have the actions on the sidebar again
          • fix how the comment window works so it wont obscure the issue you are commenting on
          • reduce the extraneous whitespace – keep in mind this is an issue tracking system – i want my data and i want it fast. I don't look at issues for fun, I look at them for a purpose. The less time I spend looking in JIRA, the better it is for me. Please keep that in mind and don't waste my time needlessly.
          • perhaps make the "Activity" area be the only sliding region and keep the core data on the top – this was always a weakness in JIRA 3.x – you read a long comment chain and have to jump contexts constantly to look at the descriptions, attachments, etc...
          • add in ways to delineate the regions on the screen
          Show
          Erik G. added a comment - I am not a big fan of the change. There is a reason why the left-hand sidebar is a good UI metaphor, especially for frequently used options. I now have to click twice to do things. I'm also extra irritated because I ended up moving to 4.1 because of the security hole in 4.0 and surprise , everything changed... I agree with most of the comments – this is a major regression in terms of usability. You should have factored in a classic mode. The fact that its "technically hard" does not cut it as an excuse. I think a number of the suggestions are quite pragmatic and should be put in place as soon as possible. You could probably make a lot of us much happier if you did a couple of simple things: make it optional to have the actions on the sidebar again fix how the comment window works so it wont obscure the issue you are commenting on reduce the extraneous whitespace – keep in mind this is an issue tracking system – i want my data and i want it fast. I don't look at issues for fun, I look at them for a purpose. The less time I spend looking in JIRA, the better it is for me. Please keep that in mind and don't waste my time needlessly. perhaps make the "Activity" area be the only sliding region and keep the core data on the top – this was always a weakness in JIRA 3.x – you read a long comment chain and have to jump contexts constantly to look at the descriptions, attachments, etc... add in ways to delineate the regions on the screen
          Hide
          Brett Ryan added a comment - - edited

          @Eric G.

          I wouldn't advise making the activity area the only sliding portion, most users can't see the activity area without scrolling.

          Configuring Workflow - Working with transition properties describes how to change the order and how many transition actions appear.

          Personally I think that reducing the amount of workflow actions makes it clearer that you intend the user to action one of the first two actions and having your other less desired transitions under the "Workflow" button, such as "Close Issue", you don't really want them doing it but also don't want to stop them doing it.

          Show
          Brett Ryan added a comment - - edited @Eric G. I wouldn't advise making the activity area the only sliding portion, most users can't see the activity area without scrolling. Configuring Workflow - Working with transition properties describes how to change the order and how many transition actions appear. Personally I think that reducing the amount of workflow actions makes it clearer that you intend the user to action one of the first two actions and having your other less desired transitions under the "Workflow" button, such as "Close Issue", you don't really want them doing it but also don't want to stop them doing it.
          Hide
          Ksenia Kiseleva added a comment -

          I completely agree with Jo and Nicolas. Please give us the old theme back at least as an option, if going back to it completely is not feasible. It does look like a total failure on Atlassian part. It does look amaturish and poorly designed. It is hard to orient yourself on the screen, you don't know where to look to find things. It looks messy and unprofessional. The new one will make people not want to use Jira. It will be hard for organizations trying to convert from something else to go with Jira because of this new Jira design. It is just bad.

          I must give props to performance and behind the scenes changes that you've put into the upgrade. But please, the new look has to go!

          Show
          Ksenia Kiseleva added a comment - I completely agree with Jo and Nicolas. Please give us the old theme back at least as an option, if going back to it completely is not feasible. It does look like a total failure on Atlassian part. It does look amaturish and poorly designed. It is hard to orient yourself on the screen, you don't know where to look to find things. It looks messy and unprofessional. The new one will make people not want to use Jira. It will be hard for organizations trying to convert from something else to go with Jira because of this new Jira design. It is just bad. I must give props to performance and behind the scenes changes that you've put into the upgrade. But please, the new look has to go!
          Hide
          Brett Ryan added a comment -

          Speaking frankly here,

          I'm thinking more and more about this issue, and I have to say I think that the title needs to change. I wouldn't expect Atlassian to have to support multiple different views of the same screen. As I've stated earlier, I don't think the new UI is all that bad, sure there's a couple of tweaks needed but that's beside the point.

          The UI isn't as bad as you're all making it out to be, it's a great improvement. The reason why issues take a long time to get done is because everyone raises everything as critical or in this case blocker.

          Show
          Brett Ryan added a comment - Speaking frankly here, I'm thinking more and more about this issue, and I have to say I think that the title needs to change. I wouldn't expect Atlassian to have to support multiple different views of the same screen. As I've stated earlier, I don't think the new UI is all that bad, sure there's a couple of tweaks needed but that's beside the point. The UI isn't as bad as you're all making it out to be, it's a great improvement. The reason why issues take a long time to get done is because everyone raises everything as critical or in this case blocker.
          Hide
          Mike Curwen added a comment -

          > The UI isn't as bad as you're all making it out to be, it's a great improvement.

          Says you. Others have a different opinion, and are expressing it. That's how this works, right? And feel free to point out to me that you're just expressing your own opinion.

          > The reason why issues take a long time to get done is because everyone raises everything as critical or in this case blocker.

          I can't imagine how the reported severity has anything to do with velocity of closed issues. Atlassian has felt free (as is their right) to ignore the severity of reported issues, and they've implemented trivials in front of blockers, so how exactly does reported severity cause slowdowns?

          Show
          Mike Curwen added a comment - > The UI isn't as bad as you're all making it out to be, it's a great improvement. Says you. Others have a different opinion, and are expressing it. That's how this works, right? And feel free to point out to me that you're just expressing your own opinion. > The reason why issues take a long time to get done is because everyone raises everything as critical or in this case blocker. I can't imagine how the reported severity has anything to do with velocity of closed issues. Atlassian has felt free (as is their right) to ignore the severity of reported issues, and they've implemented trivials in front of blockers, so how exactly does reported severity cause slowdowns?
          Hide
          Matt Doar (ServiceRocket) added a comment -

          Priority in this case means "how many people feel strongly about this". I originally filed this issue as a Blocker because I wanted Atlassian to watch it more carefully than the thread in the Forum, and it seems to me that they are doing so. Edwin the PM may well choose to change the priority when it comes to 4.2 so he doesn't have any blockers outstanding. I think the problem that Brett was referring to is what I call bug inflation but I don't think it applies here.

          Show
          Matt Doar (ServiceRocket) added a comment - Priority in this case means "how many people feel strongly about this". I originally filed this issue as a Blocker because I wanted Atlassian to watch it more carefully than the thread in the Forum, and it seems to me that they are doing so. Edwin the PM may well choose to change the priority when it comes to 4.2 so he doesn't have any blockers outstanding. I think the problem that Brett was referring to is what I call bug inflation but I don't think it applies here.
          Hide
          Mark Liedtke added a comment -

          I have just removed my vote...As someone who initially "HATED" the new UI, it has really grown on me, and now I find it way more usable then the old UI. My company will be upgrading from 3.13 to 4.1 at the end of the month. I have a development 4.1 environment that have been using for about a month now that I have been using to test out some workfow and issue type/custom field changes, and can honestly say that I can not wait until the end of the month when we implement the new version. I believe adding this new feature will just add extra complexity to JIRA that is not needed, and will divert attention from implementing other features that may be more important (at least the ones I feel are more important like editing options in a select list).

          Show
          Mark Liedtke added a comment - I have just removed my vote...As someone who initially "HATED" the new UI, it has really grown on me, and now I find it way more usable then the old UI. My company will be upgrading from 3.13 to 4.1 at the end of the month. I have a development 4.1 environment that have been using for about a month now that I have been using to test out some workfow and issue type/custom field changes, and can honestly say that I can not wait until the end of the month when we implement the new version. I believe adding this new feature will just add extra complexity to JIRA that is not needed, and will divert attention from implementing other features that may be more important (at least the ones I feel are more important like editing options in a select list ).
          Hide
          mck added a comment - - edited

          Really it's a bit much for a minor version upgrade!

          The time and effort that has gone into getting staff comfortable with Jira as a tool and the whole issue tracking concept i think it would be far more successful to go back to excel sheets than to upgrade to Jira 4.1

          I'm sorry guys but apart from my dog's balls looking better than the new layout i gotta say you have completely underestimated how non-technical many of your users really are.

          Show
          mck added a comment - - edited Really it's a bit much for a minor version upgrade! The time and effort that has gone into getting staff comfortable with Jira as a tool and the whole issue tracking concept i think it would be far more successful to go back to excel sheets than to upgrade to Jira 4.1 I'm sorry guys but apart from my dog's balls looking better than the new layout i gotta say you have completely underestimated how non-technical many of your users really are.
          Hide
          Robert Sfeir added a comment -

          I know I complained about it before, but after reconsidering and putting it on a dev server, showed it to my team and everyone loves it. Yes it's a bit jarring at first, yes it's too much for a .1 release, but as developers we adapt quickly. Your users won't really care either. I no longer see the benefit of Atlassian needing to maintain 2 versions of the UI as a choice. I'm not saying it doesn't need tweaking (entirely too much white space I think, and labels need to be much darker) but I find we work quicker with it.

          Show
          Robert Sfeir added a comment - I know I complained about it before, but after reconsidering and putting it on a dev server, showed it to my team and everyone loves it. Yes it's a bit jarring at first, yes it's too much for a .1 release, but as developers we adapt quickly. Your users won't really care either. I no longer see the benefit of Atlassian needing to maintain 2 versions of the UI as a choice. I'm not saying it doesn't need tweaking (entirely too much white space I think, and labels need to be much darker) but I find we work quicker with it.
          Hide
          James M. Pelagatti added a comment -

          I agree with Jo Strand. This new interface is horrifically bad. It should be thrown out. It's shockingly awful and has virtually no redeeming qualities. I don't have time to list everything wrong with this ugly UI but here are a few of the many lowlights. (I apologize if any of this repeats earlier comments. I haven't read all the older ones.)

          1. The horrible whitewash look makes it impossible to find things quickly--was this designed for black & white monitors or something? Hasn't Atlassian heard that most people use color monitors now? Don't they understand that the careful use of color enhances a UI? Nothing anywhere stands out; it all seems to be designed to fade into the background. Why would anyone design an UI this way?

          2. The old interface had a crisp, clearly delineated shape and structure (sidebar, etc.). The new one is an amorphous collage of gray (and a little black) text. It's a pain to find anything. Nothing grabs your eye. (The People/Dates thing doesn't compare to the very useful left-hand sidebar JIRA has now.)

          3. The new interface wastes massive amount of space. There's whitespace everywhere. Things are spread out for no reason. The Attachments section wastes more space. I am so tired of software and web developers arrogantly assuming their products should take over large parts of the users' screens. I have dozens of things I want to see on my screen and across my ten Linux workspaces--JIRA is only one of those.

          4. Many tasks are now hidden away under memus. Before, the sidebar contained most every action one might want to take. One click was usually all that was necessary. New users could see their choises at a glance. Now, menus and multiple steps are frequently necessary and things are harder to find in the first place. Absolutely atrocious.

          5. Must we waste space with inane headings like "People" and "Dates"? I don't need a big label called "Dates"; I can recognize a date when I see it.

          I won't go on further here but I must also comment on the apparent rationale for the change: It seems that because the interface is "old", it must be replaced. I guess that means the quality and usability of the interface is of no importance. All that's important is whether it follows the latest fashion. Here's a message for Atlassian: We use JIRA because it helps us do our work better and faster. We don't care about fashion and fads. I don't mean to say that the UI couldn't be improved--the tabs for example could be designed better. And I'm sure other improvements could be made. But certainly not what we see in JIRA 4.1. (I won't even address the ridiculous suggestion that changing/updating the internals requires a full re-design of the interface.)

          I cannot believe that Atlassian based this lousy UI on user requests or surveys. Did JIRA customers really tell Atlassian,

          "Sure I can find everything with one click in the sidebar. But that's out-of-date. Get rid of it and hide commands in menus instead. I like extra clicking."

          or

          "Yes, delineating sections of the interface logically groups things and makes everything easy to find, but that's sooooo 2006. It's time for a modern interface where everything blends together."

          or perhaps

          "Sidebars are very clear and useful but nobody who's anybody uses those things anymore. You should toss them."

          Sorry to be so negative but this UI offends me. I guess that's because everyone here loves JIRA and adapts to it right away--and one of the reasons is the crisp clear UI.

          Show
          James M. Pelagatti added a comment - I agree with Jo Strand. This new interface is horrifically bad. It should be thrown out. It's shockingly awful and has virtually no redeeming qualities. I don't have time to list everything wrong with this ugly UI but here are a few of the many lowlights. (I apologize if any of this repeats earlier comments. I haven't read all the older ones.) 1. The horrible whitewash look makes it impossible to find things quickly--was this designed for black & white monitors or something? Hasn't Atlassian heard that most people use color monitors now? Don't they understand that the careful use of color enhances a UI? Nothing anywhere stands out; it all seems to be designed to fade into the background. Why would anyone design an UI this way? 2. The old interface had a crisp, clearly delineated shape and structure (sidebar, etc.). The new one is an amorphous collage of gray (and a little black) text. It's a pain to find anything. Nothing grabs your eye. (The People/Dates thing doesn't compare to the very useful left-hand sidebar JIRA has now.) 3. The new interface wastes massive amount of space. There's whitespace everywhere. Things are spread out for no reason. The Attachments section wastes more space. I am so tired of software and web developers arrogantly assuming their products should take over large parts of the users' screens. I have dozens of things I want to see on my screen and across my ten Linux workspaces--JIRA is only one of those. 4. Many tasks are now hidden away under memus. Before, the sidebar contained most every action one might want to take. One click was usually all that was necessary. New users could see their choises at a glance. Now, menus and multiple steps are frequently necessary and things are harder to find in the first place. Absolutely atrocious. 5. Must we waste space with inane headings like "People" and "Dates"? I don't need a big label called "Dates"; I can recognize a date when I see it. I won't go on further here but I must also comment on the apparent rationale for the change: It seems that because the interface is "old", it must be replaced. I guess that means the quality and usability of the interface is of no importance. All that's important is whether it follows the latest fashion. Here's a message for Atlassian: We use JIRA because it helps us do our work better and faster. We don't care about fashion and fads. I don't mean to say that the UI couldn't be improved--the tabs for example could be designed better. And I'm sure other improvements could be made. But certainly not what we see in JIRA 4.1. (I won't even address the ridiculous suggestion that changing/updating the internals requires a full re-design of the interface.) I cannot believe that Atlassian based this lousy UI on user requests or surveys. Did JIRA customers really tell Atlassian, "Sure I can find everything with one click in the sidebar. But that's out-of-date. Get rid of it and hide commands in menus instead. I like extra clicking." or "Yes, delineating sections of the interface logically groups things and makes everything easy to find, but that's sooooo 2006. It's time for a modern interface where everything blends together." or perhaps "Sidebars are very clear and useful but nobody who's anybody uses those things anymore. You should toss them." Sorry to be so negative but this UI offends me. I guess that's because everyone here loves JIRA and adapts to it right away--and one of the reasons is the crisp clear UI.
          Hide
          Brett Ryan added a comment -

          Please guys, the abuse is getting out of hand, constructive criticism is all that's needed here, not sarcasm and derogatory comments.

          People with visual impairment are now better off with the options under menus, the more common options are now visible. What form of colour is it that needs to be used? Is it hard to read black on white?

          Show
          Brett Ryan added a comment - Please guys, the abuse is getting out of hand, constructive criticism is all that's needed here, not sarcasm and derogatory comments. People with visual impairment are now better off with the options under menus, the more common options are now visible. What form of colour is it that needs to be used? Is it hard to read black on white?
          Hide
          Chai Ying Chan [Atlassian] added a comment -

          From customer (https://support.atlassian.com/browse/JSP-57577):

          When I add a comment to an issue I click on the button "comment" and a text box appears right below the button
          (this is good, compared to the previous approach when the comment box appeared at the bottom of the page)

          The downside is that once the textbox filled instead clicking on the "add" button right below the comment text box it could appear more straightforward to click on the "comment" button above the text box

          Having an highlighted button "Comment" and a button "Add" at the same time lead to misunderstanding

          Show
          Chai Ying Chan [Atlassian] added a comment - From customer ( https://support.atlassian.com/browse/JSP-57577): When I add a comment to an issue I click on the button "comment" and a text box appears right below the button (this is good, compared to the previous approach when the comment box appeared at the bottom of the page) The downside is that once the textbox filled instead clicking on the "add" button right below the comment text box it could appear more straightforward to click on the "comment" button above the text box Having an highlighted button "Comment" and a button "Add" at the same time lead to misunderstanding
          Hide
          Dale Worley added a comment -

          I don't know what got into Atlassian's head about the new display format, but there are a lot of things about it that I find very annoying. (Including especially the full inch of my screen taken up with "Make the 4.1 UI a choice" as I enter this.) With ver. 3 I would have vigorously recommended Jira to anyone. With ver. 4, I would warn people away from it. The display of Bad Attitude about criticism on the part of Atlassian employees (so far they've closed 4 of my issues about problems with the new UI) leads me to believe that the situation will not improve in the future. (Unfortunately our project is now stuck with it, and I'm told that ver. 3 has significant security problems.)

          Show
          Dale Worley added a comment - I don't know what got into Atlassian's head about the new display format, but there are a lot of things about it that I find very annoying. (Including especially the full inch of my screen taken up with "Make the 4.1 UI a choice" as I enter this.) With ver. 3 I would have vigorously recommended Jira to anyone. With ver. 4, I would warn people away from it. The display of Bad Attitude about criticism on the part of Atlassian employees (so far they've closed 4 of my issues about problems with the new UI) leads me to believe that the situation will not improve in the future. (Unfortunately our project is now stuck with it, and I'm told that ver. 3 has significant security problems.)
          Hide
          John Heller added a comment -

          Overall, the new UI has some great improvements. I agree with the good points raised so far and I think that generally the layout is improved and more "modern" - but...

          I'm with the "too white" brigade. There is very little to guide the eye and delineate the different sections. In particular I think the Description field is too hard to find. On issue screens with a lot of fields, its not always clear which value is in which field. A feint line between them, or even a grey background on mouse-over would help - something like the way comments are separated.

          I take it from comments by the Atlassian people that there is some work being done to improve the highlighting. I'll look forward to that, but won't be upgrading until then.

          Show
          John Heller added a comment - Overall, the new UI has some great improvements. I agree with the good points raised so far and I think that generally the layout is improved and more "modern" - but... I'm with the "too white" brigade. There is very little to guide the eye and delineate the different sections. In particular I think the Description field is too hard to find. On issue screens with a lot of fields, its not always clear which value is in which field. A feint line between them, or even a grey background on mouse-over would help - something like the way comments are separated. I take it from comments by the Atlassian people that there is some work being done to improve the highlighting. I'll look forward to that, but won't be upgrading until then.
          Hide
          werner mueller added a comment -

          hello

          i appreciate atlassian is investing in improved usability. when i look to confluence which comes with themes so people can choose what they like that way seems much smoother than just hitting people with ui revolutions.

          we will also skip the 4.1 upgrade and hope for an even better 4.2 version.

          the timing is a bit unlucky. the 4.0. branch comes along with security issues so any new installation we do needs to be patched from the start if we choose not to work with the new ui.

          since we also sell atlassian products as part of our toolchain and quite some training material depends on the way it looks i'm unhappy with the long journey for an improved usability.

          to make the new ui a choice (as part of a theme or a setting) is sort of the minimal thing i do expect.

          added a vote.
          thanks!

          Show
          werner mueller added a comment - hello i appreciate atlassian is investing in improved usability. when i look to confluence which comes with themes so people can choose what they like that way seems much smoother than just hitting people with ui revolutions. we will also skip the 4.1 upgrade and hope for an even better 4.2 version. the timing is a bit unlucky. the 4.0. branch comes along with security issues so any new installation we do needs to be patched from the start if we choose not to work with the new ui. since we also sell atlassian products as part of our toolchain and quite some training material depends on the way it looks i'm unhappy with the long journey for an improved usability. to make the new ui a choice (as part of a theme or a setting) is sort of the minimal thing i do expect. added a vote. thanks!
          Hide
          DoItNow added a comment -

          Bring back the old view
          Do it now!
          The new one is horrible!

          Show
          DoItNow added a comment - Bring back the old view Do it now! The new one is horrible!
          Hide
          Neal Applebaum added a comment -

          Irony of ironies, I am trying to copy the summary of this issue ("Feedback for view issue page") into my clipboard in order to summarize the situation with our upgrade choices. And using IE8, I can't even copy the issue summary into the clipboard .. and I notice that the preview icon shows my about to be posted comment in a different font (Arial) from which it is being entered in (Courier) or is going to be displayed in (not sure what font that is).

          Show
          Neal Applebaum added a comment - Irony of ironies, I am trying to copy the summary of this issue ("Feedback for view issue page") into my clipboard in order to summarize the situation with our upgrade choices. And using IE8, I can't even copy the issue summary into the clipboard .. and I notice that the preview icon shows my about to be posted comment in a different font (Arial) from which it is being entered in (Courier) or is going to be displayed in (not sure what font that is).
          Hide
          Gordon Mohr added a comment - - edited

          Just got the new look via JIRA Studio last week. The one big problem is that on one of my typical interfaces – the 13" MacBook Pro screen with Firefox 3.X – it's now possible for that fixed-float title+operations-bar area to take up half the viewport . Just allowing it to scroll off the top would be a major usability aid; I don't need a constant reminder of the issue title and scrolling to top or bottom to comment is easy enough already – the fixed operation-bar isn't earning its permanent central placement.

          Made a separate issue for just this one concern, which could be evaluated/ameliorated without other major changes. See http://jira.atlassian.com/browse/JRA-21644 .

          Show
          Gordon Mohr added a comment - - edited Just got the new look via JIRA Studio last week. The one big problem is that on one of my typical interfaces – the 13" MacBook Pro screen with Firefox 3.X – it's now possible for that fixed-float title+operations-bar area to take up half the viewport . Just allowing it to scroll off the top would be a major usability aid; I don't need a constant reminder of the issue title and scrolling to top or bottom to comment is easy enough already – the fixed operation-bar isn't earning its permanent central placement. Made a separate issue for just this one concern, which could be evaluated/ameliorated without other major changes. See http://jira.atlassian.com/browse/JRA-21644 .
          Hide
          adam marshall added a comment -

          I must agree with Mr DoItNow - just dump the new interface and bring back the old one.

          If Atlassian doesn't want to support 2 interfaces then dump the new one and just use the old one which was the best interface to any issue tracking system.

          Show
          adam marshall added a comment - I must agree with Mr DoItNow - just dump the new interface and bring back the old one. If Atlassian doesn't want to support 2 interfaces then dump the new one and just use the old one which was the best interface to any issue tracking system.
          Hide
          Jeff Kirby added a comment -

          So far most of our users like the new view issue page look. They like that the edit link is the first available button. They like that a lot of the other clutter that doesn't get used much is in the Action or View pull downs. They like that the description is more obvious. They like that the user fields are grouped together. They like that the time tracking doesn't take up so much real estate. They like that the updated and created fields are more obvious.

          One thing that I did that appeased a few detractors was to simply alter the CSS and reduce the overall font so that the fonts are the same size as Jira 3. That's a very simple, 10 min alteration. All I did was reduce all the applicable font multiplications like 1.7 em to 1em.

          Show
          Jeff Kirby added a comment - So far most of our users like the new view issue page look. They like that the edit link is the first available button. They like that a lot of the other clutter that doesn't get used much is in the Action or View pull downs. They like that the description is more obvious. They like that the user fields are grouped together. They like that the time tracking doesn't take up so much real estate. They like that the updated and created fields are more obvious. One thing that I did that appeased a few detractors was to simply alter the CSS and reduce the overall font so that the fonts are the same size as Jira 3. That's a very simple, 10 min alteration. All I did was reduce all the applicable font multiplications like 1.7 em to 1em.
          Hide
          G B added a comment -

          One thing that I did that appeased a few detractors was to simply alter the CSS and reduce the overall font so that the fonts are the same size as Jira 3.

          That is welcome news. What version of JIRA will see this change?

          Show
          G B added a comment - One thing that I did that appeased a few detractors was to simply alter the CSS and reduce the overall font so that the fonts are the same size as Jira 3. That is welcome news. What version of JIRA will see this change?
          Hide
          Jeff Kirby added a comment -

          That is welcome news. What version of JIRA will see this change?

          only the version in use at my company (that is, I, like you, am an Atlassian customer). Sorry. Feel free to change your version as I did mine.

          Show
          Jeff Kirby added a comment - That is welcome news. What version of JIRA will see this change? only the version in use at my company (that is, I, like you, am an Atlassian customer). Sorry. Feel free to change your version as I did mine.
          Hide
          G B added a comment -

          Ah, I misunderstood the situation. I agree that hitting "Ctrl-minus" twice in Firefox makes JIRA 4.1 more bearable, but I can't ask our users to do that every time they use JIRA. What say you Atlassian?

          Show
          G B added a comment - Ah, I misunderstood the situation. I agree that hitting "Ctrl-minus" twice in Firefox makes JIRA 4.1 more bearable, but I can't ask our users to do that every time they use JIRA. What say you Atlassian?
          Hide
          John Heller added a comment -

          I've just attached a screenshot of an issue with a lot of custom fields. On the old UI, they were in a clear table. On the new UI it requires considerable focus and effort to see which value goes with which field. Is this good UI design? A simple feint line between fields or even a grey mouse-over (as in the comments) would help.

          This is symptomatic of the general problem we have with the new UI. We like the new structure and layout, but the overall lack of guides or delimiters to the structural elements means more effort is required to find the information you are looking for.

          I was surprised to see someone comment recently that the Description is more obvious. This is the first field I look for with a new issue. It had a prominent box around it before, but now its lost in a sea of fashionable white.

          I hope this will help Atlassian see why so many people are reluctant to upgrade and make their users work harder to find the information they want.

          Show
          John Heller added a comment - I've just attached a screenshot of an issue with a lot of custom fields. On the old UI, they were in a clear table. On the new UI it requires considerable focus and effort to see which value goes with which field. Is this good UI design? A simple feint line between fields or even a grey mouse-over (as in the comments) would help. This is symptomatic of the general problem we have with the new UI. We like the new structure and layout, but the overall lack of guides or delimiters to the structural elements means more effort is required to find the information you are looking for. I was surprised to see someone comment recently that the Description is more obvious. This is the first field I look for with a new issue. It had a prominent box around it before, but now its lost in a sea of fashionable white. I hope this will help Atlassian see why so many people are reluctant to upgrade and make their users work harder to find the information they want.
          Hide
          Eduardo Machado added a comment -

          I think the previous message by John reflects our felling about the new interface.

          The lack of visual boundaries makes this view very unreadable, specially when dealing with several custom fields.

          Could Atlassian at least provide an alternative css file to minimize this effect.

          Show
          Eduardo Machado added a comment - I think the previous message by John reflects our felling about the new interface. The lack of visual boundaries makes this view very unreadable, specially when dealing with several custom fields. Could Atlassian at least provide an alternative css file to minimize this effect.
          Hide
          Thorsten Deuter added a comment -

          Personally I can live with most of the UI changes if at least the description would be highlighted by a different background color or a frame which is not made up of thin grey lines. I'm attaching a screenshot of how it could look like (I'm no UI expert...) Interesting enough, Edwin himself inserted a grey box into the description of this issue, because he seems to know that some more structure in the layout is needed.

          The lack of visible structure was menstioned by almost all of our users. I hope there will be an option for the issue view in the near future.

          Show
          Thorsten Deuter added a comment - Personally I can live with most of the UI changes if at least the description would be highlighted by a different background color or a frame which is not made up of thin grey lines. I'm attaching a screenshot of how it could look like (I'm no UI expert...) Interesting enough, Edwin himself inserted a grey box into the description of this issue, because he seems to know that some more structure in the layout is needed. The lack of visible structure was menstioned by almost all of our users. I hope there will be an option for the issue view in the near future.
          Hide
          Marek Vsechovsky added a comment -

          I too have to join all the dissatisfied users. I'd like to upgrade, but not to this when I see it. I chose JIRA for how clear the layout was. Now it is all visually mashed together like some of the competition I refused to use for my company. I've been waiting for some other issues to be resolved, but now I have to pray that the interface will be improved by the time those other improvements make it in. I really liked the previous layout the first time I laid my eyes on it and it proved to be very clear and useful. I feel complete opposite with the new layout. I'm staying with my older version for now.

          Show
          Marek Vsechovsky added a comment - I too have to join all the dissatisfied users. I'd like to upgrade, but not to this when I see it. I chose JIRA for how clear the layout was. Now it is all visually mashed together like some of the competition I refused to use for my company. I've been waiting for some other issues to be resolved, but now I have to pray that the interface will be improved by the time those other improvements make it in. I really liked the previous layout the first time I laid my eyes on it and it proved to be very clear and useful. I feel complete opposite with the new layout. I'm staying with my older version for now.
          Hide
          Thomas added a comment - - edited

          I do not want to repeat all the things, people have written here before about the new issue look of Jira. I think the design is confusing and not well-thought-out. One reason why we have chosen Jira is because of its former User Interface which was much better than any other issue tracker system. Now I have to say, we will stay on the version 4.0.1 as long as it is possible. Please give us back the old look, perhaps slightly modernized.

          Show
          Thomas added a comment - - edited I do not want to repeat all the things, people have written here before about the new issue look of Jira. I think the design is confusing and not well-thought-out. One reason why we have chosen Jira is because of its former User Interface which was much better than any other issue tracker system. Now I have to say, we will stay on the version 4.0.1 as long as it is possible. Please give us back the old look, perhaps slightly modernized.
          Hide
          Andy Brook (Javahollic Software) added a comment -

          FYI 4.2m7 enables the collapse of all major field areas (Details, Attachments, People etc) but makes no detectable change to the layout or styling of the issue screen - likely no changes to come in the final 4.2 release...

          Show
          Andy Brook (Javahollic Software) added a comment - FYI 4.2m7 enables the collapse of all major field areas (Details, Attachments, People etc) but makes no detectable change to the layout or styling of the issue screen - likely no changes to come in the final 4.2 release...
          Hide
          Mike Miller added a comment -

          When a field section such as Description is collapsed it shows part of the text. However aside from the difference between the direction of the arrow, (> vs V), there is no indication that the text overflows. This could be quite confusing for non-technical users that are not expecting the text to overflow. We need some kind of more obvious way to indicate when text is overflowing when it is collapsed.

          Show
          Mike Miller added a comment - When a field section such as Description is collapsed it shows part of the text. However aside from the difference between the direction of the arrow, (> vs V), there is no indication that the text overflows. This could be quite confusing for non-technical users that are not expecting the text to overflow. We need some kind of more obvious way to indicate when text is overflowing when it is collapsed.
          Hide
          Chris Brookins added a comment -

          @Andy that is extremely disappointing to hear

          Show
          Chris Brookins added a comment - @Andy that is extremely disappointing to hear
          Hide
          David Hergert [Windstream] added a comment -

          Throwing our hat into the ring... we also are hesitant to upgrade due to the UI changes. I think we'll eventually have to upgrade for other reasons but we're certainly not on the bleeding edge of upgrading anymore like we used to.

          Judging from some of the screenshots from the 4.1 release notes, it appears in 4.2 (and even 4.1.2) the headings and labels are actually darker. Not sure if its an illusion but it appears they stand out more and appear less washed out now. I think its a step in the right direction; I think some of the major changes are good but I think there are some minor tweaks and improvements that could be made to make it much better, many of which have already been stated in above comments.

          We haven't heard from Atlassian on this in a few months. Are you guys actively reviewing this feedback and planning on incorporating any changes to improve it?

          Show
          David Hergert [Windstream] added a comment - Throwing our hat into the ring... we also are hesitant to upgrade due to the UI changes. I think we'll eventually have to upgrade for other reasons but we're certainly not on the bleeding edge of upgrading anymore like we used to. Judging from some of the screenshots from the 4.1 release notes, it appears in 4.2 (and even 4.1.2) the headings and labels are actually darker. Not sure if its an illusion but it appears they stand out more and appear less washed out now. I think its a step in the right direction; I think some of the major changes are good but I think there are some minor tweaks and improvements that could be made to make it much better, many of which have already been stated in above comments. We haven't heard from Atlassian on this in a few months. Are you guys actively reviewing this feedback and planning on incorporating any changes to improve it?
          Hide
          Edwin Wong [Atlassian] added a comment -

          Andy,

          That is not correct. We are still working on changes on the view issue page, so expect to see some changes soon.

          Cheers,
          Edwin

          Show
          Edwin Wong [Atlassian] added a comment - Andy, That is not correct. We are still working on changes on the view issue page, so expect to see some changes soon. Cheers, Edwin
          Hide
          Edwin Wong [Atlassian] added a comment -

          David,

          Yes, we are hearing your feedback and yes we are working on it.

          Cheers,
          Edwin

          Show
          Edwin Wong [Atlassian] added a comment - David, Yes, we are hearing your feedback and yes we are working on it. Cheers, Edwin
          Hide
          Marek Vsechovsky added a comment - - edited

          I did download the new version to try. It is better than it seems to be at first glance, but it still is not making me happy to upgrade. There is definitely too much white space and the text is too big to my liking. However, I also discovered that the change history tab now shows the two versions side-by-side, instead of highlighting the changes nicely as in 4.0. So now I need to read both versions line-by-line to actually find what was changed!? How is that an improvement???
          Also, I don't see why the dates section has to take so much space (and be above the time tracking, but that probably depends on an opinion - I'd personally put it right below the "People" section). I also reckon that a vertical rule separating that section would visually help a lot. Further, I feel that smaller line height would help in the Details section, which I would personally return to the sidebar, where all used to be kept nicely together (whilst in a wide window it gets too far apart). I also think that slightly different background of the sidebar might not hurt either.
          I now got behind the height of the note field with this note and I cannot see what I'm writing anymore as the scrollbar is jumping back and forth with each letter I type. Veeeeeery annoying to say the least!

          Show
          Marek Vsechovsky added a comment - - edited I did download the new version to try. It is better than it seems to be at first glance, but it still is not making me happy to upgrade. There is definitely too much white space and the text is too big to my liking. However, I also discovered that the change history tab now shows the two versions side-by-side, instead of highlighting the changes nicely as in 4.0. So now I need to read both versions line-by-line to actually find what was changed!? How is that an improvement??? Also, I don't see why the dates section has to take so much space (and be above the time tracking, but that probably depends on an opinion - I'd personally put it right below the "People" section). I also reckon that a vertical rule separating that section would visually help a lot. Further, I feel that smaller line height would help in the Details section, which I would personally return to the sidebar, where all used to be kept nicely together (whilst in a wide window it gets too far apart). I also think that slightly different background of the sidebar might not hurt either. I now got behind the height of the note field with this note and I cannot see what I'm writing anymore as the scrollbar is jumping back and forth with each letter I type. Veeeeeery annoying to say the least!
          Hide
          Marek Vsechovsky added a comment -

          I forgot to mention regarding the scroll bar jumping issue in the note that I'm using this now in IE8.

          Show
          Marek Vsechovsky added a comment - I forgot to mention regarding the scroll bar jumping issue in the note that I'm using this now in IE8.
          Hide
          Andy Brook (Javahollic Software) added a comment -

          Edwin, happy to stand corrected, looking forward to updates!

          Show
          Andy Brook (Javahollic Software) added a comment - Edwin, happy to stand corrected, looking forward to updates!
          Hide
          Chris Tashjian added a comment -

          I've been holding off on upgrading from 4.0 because of this as well. As a previous commenter pointed out, there needs to be some way to differentiate between the fields. As seen in the attachment to this issue (Screenshot-multiple-fileds.png), it's very difficult to follow without horizontal lines between the fields, especially when you add multi-line text fields in there.

          Show
          Chris Tashjian added a comment - I've been holding off on upgrading from 4.0 because of this as well. As a previous commenter pointed out, there needs to be some way to differentiate between the fields. As seen in the attachment to this issue (Screenshot-multiple-fileds.png), it's very difficult to follow without horizontal lines between the fields, especially when you add multi-line text fields in there.
          Hide
          Matt Doar (ServiceRocket) added a comment -

          So Edwin,

          Are you working on the feedback, or working on not hearing the feedback?

          I'm kidding, I'm kidding.

          ~Matt

          Show
          Matt Doar (ServiceRocket) added a comment - So Edwin, Are you working on the feedback, or working on not hearing the feedback? I'm kidding, I'm kidding. ~Matt
          Hide
          werner mueller added a comment -

          I added a pdf with some thoughts of things I don't like on the new screen.

          Happy to hear Atlassian is working on it!

          Show
          werner mueller added a comment - I added a pdf with some thoughts of things I don't like on the new screen. Happy to hear Atlassian is working on it!
          Hide
          Markus Lepper added a comment - - edited

          @Mike: Maybe this was a missunderstanding. Comment edited:

          Please replace
          On top of all the complaints (which I see the same) one more:
          It is really annoying that the menubar disappeares when reading issues with some comments (and therefore scrolling down).

          The good and useful and userfriendly 4.0 ui allows quickly changing between projects, issues, dashboards and admin section.
          4.1: Just

          by

          Indeed, due to the endless white spaces the need to scroll-down starts much earlier.
          4.1: Just

          Currently will stick to 4.0 (already started checking alternatives and migrate if there is no reaction in next few weeks) if Atlassian does not support in any way at least roughly the look&feel of the 4.0 ui (or improved 4.1 substantially). For us there is only few weeks left until we will change tools....

          I very much hope* that Atlassian reacts on all these user comments before too many look for other options.

          (*Considering Atlassian's handling of top scored and years-not-touched product errors unfortunately does not give too much positive feeling that just now they might act differently. What a pity...)

          Show
          Markus Lepper added a comment - - edited @Mike: Maybe this was a missunderstanding. Comment edited: Please replace On top of all the complaints (which I see the same) one more: It is really annoying that the menubar disappeares when reading issues with some comments (and therefore scrolling down). The good and useful and userfriendly 4.0 ui allows quickly changing between projects, issues, dashboards and admin section. 4.1: Just by Indeed, due to the endless white spaces the need to scroll-down starts much earlier. 4.1: Just Currently will stick to 4.0 (already started checking alternatives and migrate if there is no reaction in next few weeks) if Atlassian does not support in any way at least roughly the look&feel of the 4.0 ui (or improved 4.1 substantially). For us there is only few weeks left until we will change tools.... I very much hope* that Atlassian reacts on all these user comments before too many look for other options. (*Considering Atlassian's handling of top scored and years-not-touched product errors unfortunately does not give too much positive feeling that just now they might act differently. What a pity...)
          Hide
          Mike Curwen added a comment -

          but Markus, in fairness, those menus scroll off versions of JIRA < 4.1 (or, did you mean that because of the increased white space, that issues now require scrolling that didn't before...)

          (I can't believe I'm defending 4.1 UI)

          Show
          Mike Curwen added a comment - but Markus, in fairness, those menus scroll off versions of JIRA < 4.1 (or, did you mean that because of the increased white space, that issues now require scrolling that didn't before...) (I can't believe I'm defending 4.1 UI)
          Hide
          Michael added a comment -

          The comments on this issue is full of drama queens. When I first saw the new interface I was leaning toward liking it. As I use it (I have upgraded to 4.1.2) I see nothing to change my mind.

          The interface is much cleaner. The left-hand side menu on the issues in previous versions was getting out of control. The new buttons on the top makes it much cleaner. On the old interface all the available options/actions would disappear once you scrolled down into the issue. With the 4.1 interface all options/actions are available even when you scroll. This is a drastic improvement. Still being able to scroll the issue when you are commenting is another drastic improvement.

          Are there things that need to be improved? Definitely. However, they are no more than minor tweaks:

          1. The sections need to be delineated better (my only real complaint with the whole interface, everything else is minor)
          2. The fonts are too big
          3. There is too much white space (probably the result of the font size)

          These three seem to be the common complaints and they are certainly nothing more than minor tweaks. I am sure Atlassian will fix these especially since a few comments above Atlassian commented that they are looking at the feedback and making changes.

          Show
          Michael added a comment - The comments on this issue is full of drama queens. When I first saw the new interface I was leaning toward liking it. As I use it (I have upgraded to 4.1.2) I see nothing to change my mind. The interface is much cleaner. The left-hand side menu on the issues in previous versions was getting out of control. The new buttons on the top makes it much cleaner. On the old interface all the available options/actions would disappear once you scrolled down into the issue. With the 4.1 interface all options/actions are available even when you scroll. This is a drastic improvement. Still being able to scroll the issue when you are commenting is another drastic improvement. Are there things that need to be improved? Definitely. However, they are no more than minor tweaks: The sections need to be delineated better (my only real complaint with the whole interface, everything else is minor) The fonts are too big There is too much white space (probably the result of the font size) These three seem to be the common complaints and they are certainly nothing more than minor tweaks. I am sure Atlassian will fix these especially since a few comments above Atlassian commented that they are looking at the feedback and making changes.
          Hide
          Chris Cralle added a comment - - edited

          Staying op 4.0 until they fix the UI. It is wasteful, distracting, and non-productive. There are zero redeeming or beneficial reasons to upgrade to this UI. It is All Show, No Go.

          Show
          Chris Cralle added a comment - - edited Staying op 4.0 until they fix the UI. It is wasteful, distracting, and non-productive. There are zero redeeming or beneficial reasons to upgrade to this UI. It is All Show, No Go.
          Hide
          mck added a comment -

          Michael Parmeley: please don't be someone that loves to post "it works for me" on bug reports as if this somehow marks the bug as invalid. Beyond looking stupid and obnoxious it really doesn't help anyone and does not contribute. Of course not everyone dislikes the new UI, that's a blatant given. The fact that so many dislike it, regardless of how they express it, is what is important here. For a business this has to be an incredibly serious issue and i bet will be used in someone's book as a usecase about a) how to lose customers, and b) how to rip the UI out from under your users' feet.

          Show
          mck added a comment - Michael Parmeley: please don't be someone that loves to post "it works for me" on bug reports as if this somehow marks the bug as invalid. Beyond looking stupid and obnoxious it really doesn't help anyone and does not contribute. Of course not everyone dislikes the new UI, that's a blatant given. The fact that so many dislike it, regardless of how they express it, is what is important here. For a business this has to be an incredibly serious issue and i bet will be used in someone's book as a usecase about a) how to lose customers, and b) how to rip the UI out from under your users' feet.
          Hide
          Gili added a comment -

          Michael,

          Yes, the comments are full of drama queens but the new UI is pretty atrocious. Atlassian has yet to address the most common complaints in spite of having an entire dot-release to do it in. They have added totally unrelated features like collapsable elements that no one here has asked for.

          All Atlassian has to do is address the most common complaints in the upcoming release. This will go a long way towards addressing our concerns.

          Show
          Gili added a comment - Michael, Yes, the comments are full of drama queens but the new UI is pretty atrocious. Atlassian has yet to address the most common complaints in spite of having an entire dot-release to do it in. They have added totally unrelated features like collapsable elements that no one here has asked for. All Atlassian has to do is address the most common complaints in the upcoming release. This will go a long way towards addressing our concerns.
          Hide
          Mike Curwen added a comment -

          @Michael Parmeley: ad hominem much? Your first sentence colors my perception of the entirety of the rest of your post (which is well reasoned and presented). It's a shame, really.

          "nothing more than minor tweaks". It's true that to fix the problems, it involves 'minor' changes to CSS and perhaps some layout. But I think you're conflating the complexity of the fix, with the impact of the problem being fixed. To make the changes is indeed, not complex. But I'm in agreement with many others here. Atlassian seems to have sacrified much of the function for an entirely new form.

          It "looks" pretty (from a certain perspective), but it's harder to use. I challenge you to examine any issue with several small comments on the old <4.1 JIRA UI (or bugzilla, or heaven forbid, youtrack), and then look at a similar issue on 4.1+. How can clearly delimited comments be less functional than comments that seem to all blend together, with only a ridiculously light gray, 1px line separating them? It's literally harder to see individual comments. You also don't see what you can do with them, until you hover over them. Ugh. What, am I just too old? Time to get new glasses? Time to bump down the resolution on my monitor? Time to get out of the way and let web2.0 take over?

          And the other information that used to be very quick to locate along the left hand side, is now spread out across the top. I'm just not sure how that's more functional. It seems the UX people haven't even heard of the golden triangle. What, was that concept debunked when I wasn't looking?

          Anyways, if there's drama in this thread, it's because we might not be as generous as you, when you say "I am sure Atlassian will fix these...". There's a bunch of us here that aren't so sure, and we're reacting because something that worked perfectly well for us, has completely changed for no good reason (as we see it). Speaking only for myself, it's been my experience that ultra-polite discussions about what we'd oh so very much like to see, generally gets you very little. (not just with Atlassian, I mean in life). Neither do unproductive rants. I think what's called for, is a fine balance of "this is really bleeping broken, what the bleep do you think you're doing?!?" (which lets them know that their change has provoked a visceral, emotional reaction) with suggestions on how to make it better (which I also see in abundance). In other words, everything was just fine, without your complaint about the complainers.

          Show
          Mike Curwen added a comment - @Michael Parmeley: ad hominem much? Your first sentence colors my perception of the entirety of the rest of your post (which is well reasoned and presented). It's a shame, really. "nothing more than minor tweaks". It's true that to fix the problems, it involves 'minor' changes to CSS and perhaps some layout. But I think you're conflating the complexity of the fix, with the impact of the problem being fixed. To make the changes is indeed, not complex. But I'm in agreement with many others here. Atlassian seems to have sacrified much of the function for an entirely new form. It "looks" pretty (from a certain perspective), but it's harder to use. I challenge you to examine any issue with several small comments on the old <4.1 JIRA UI (or bugzilla, or heaven forbid, youtrack), and then look at a similar issue on 4.1+. How can clearly delimited comments be less functional than comments that seem to all blend together, with only a ridiculously light gray, 1px line separating them? It's literally harder to see individual comments. You also don't see what you can do with them, until you hover over them. Ugh. What, am I just too old? Time to get new glasses? Time to bump down the resolution on my monitor? Time to get out of the way and let web2.0 take over? And the other information that used to be very quick to locate along the left hand side, is now spread out across the top. I'm just not sure how that's more functional. It seems the UX people haven't even heard of the golden triangle. What, was that concept debunked when I wasn't looking? Anyways, if there's drama in this thread, it's because we might not be as generous as you, when you say "I am sure Atlassian will fix these...". There's a bunch of us here that aren't so sure, and we're reacting because something that worked perfectly well for us, has completely changed for no good reason (as we see it). Speaking only for myself, it's been my experience that ultra-polite discussions about what we'd oh so very much like to see, generally gets you very little. (not just with Atlassian, I mean in life). Neither do unproductive rants. I think what's called for, is a fine balance of "this is really bleeping broken, what the bleep do you think you're doing?!?" (which lets them know that their change has provoked a visceral, emotional reaction) with suggestions on how to make it better (which I also see in abundance). In other words, everything was just fine, without your complaint about the complainers.
          Hide
          Edwin Wong [Atlassian] added a comment -

          Hi guys,

          Thanks for your patience and honest feedback, we are listening and really appreciate the time you all have taken to raise your concerns.

          We've been hard at work tackling some of these problems, and want to share with you some screenshots of the changes we're making in JIRA 4.2 targeted for early Q4. Your feedback is welcome and requested.

          Some of the changes shown in the attached screenshot for 4.2 are:

          • Reduced the line height of text in the entire page to reduce the space between elements.
          • Made the section headings much stronger and colored to make it stand out much more to give more structure to the page.
          • We've separated out the description field into its own separate section to make it stand out more
          • Included division lines for custom fields to give more structure to the section.
          • Added Labels as highlighted bubbles to give more clarity and sense of identity to the labels.


          (They are the same screenshot, with the one on the left annotated.)

          Things we are still working right now on for 4.2:

          • Voters & Watchers - Moving around the votes and watches trying to convey the information in a space sensitive manner that is also obvious

          Beyond 4.2, we are looking at addressing:

          • Making the details section stand out even more. (More to come on this).
          • Looking at reducing font size while still making the issue clear/easy to read
          • Making the issue key more obvious to find

          We will be providing iterative screenshots on this issue and most likely will be splitting this issue into other issues to track specific areas of the problem and solutions. We want an open conversation and welcome you to provide comments and your own screenshots attached to this issue so we can understand your environments better to simulate issue testing.

          The next EAP release (EAP3) should have these changes available to review as well.

          Cheers,
          Edwin

          Show
          Edwin Wong [Atlassian] added a comment - Hi guys, Thanks for your patience and honest feedback, we are listening and really appreciate the time you all have taken to raise your concerns. We've been hard at work tackling some of these problems, and want to share with you some screenshots of the changes we're making in JIRA 4.2 targeted for early Q4. Your feedback is welcome and requested. Some of the changes shown in the attached screenshot for 4.2 are: Reduced the line height of text in the entire page to reduce the space between elements. Made the section headings much stronger and colored to make it stand out much more to give more structure to the page. We've separated out the description field into its own separate section to make it stand out more Included division lines for custom fields to give more structure to the section. Added Labels as highlighted bubbles to give more clarity and sense of identity to the labels. (They are the same screenshot, with the one on the left annotated.) Things we are still working right now on for 4.2: Voters & Watchers - Moving around the votes and watches trying to convey the information in a space sensitive manner that is also obvious Beyond 4.2, we are looking at addressing: Making the details section stand out even more. (More to come on this). Looking at reducing font size while still making the issue clear/easy to read Making the issue key more obvious to find We will be providing iterative screenshots on this issue and most likely will be splitting this issue into other issues to track specific areas of the problem and solutions. We want an open conversation and welcome you to provide comments and your own screenshots attached to this issue so we can understand your environments better to simulate issue testing. The next EAP release (EAP3) should have these changes available to review as well. Cheers, Edwin
          Hide
          Matt Doar (ServiceRocket) added a comment -

          I see Edwin has attached some images, presumably of what 4.2 will bring.

          Show
          Matt Doar (ServiceRocket) added a comment - I see Edwin has attached some images, presumably of what 4.2 will bring.
          Hide
          John Heller added a comment -

          The screen shots of proposed changes in 4.2 look very promising. They address our main concerns:-

          • darker heading to delineate the structural elements
          • lines between custom fields improves readability
          • prominent (but collapsible) Description field

          It appears to be a good balance between the desired "clean" look and usability. Keep up the good work guys.

          Show
          John Heller added a comment - The screen shots of proposed changes in 4.2 look very promising. They address our main concerns:- darker heading to delineate the structural elements lines between custom fields improves readability prominent (but collapsible) Description field It appears to be a good balance between the desired "clean" look and usability. Keep up the good work guys.
          Hide
          Marek Vsechovsky added a comment -

          MUCH BETTER!!

          • What I especially like is that the Votes and Watchers are now on one line, not taking too much space because they really don't have to.
          • I would still try moving the Time Tracking section above the Dates, which seem less needed to me.
          • I would still definitely give a vote to a tad smaller fonts.
            Otherwise it is good to see that I might be able to upgrade when this is out. What's presented here is already acceptable.
          Show
          Marek Vsechovsky added a comment - MUCH BETTER!! What I especially like is that the Votes and Watchers are now on one line, not taking too much space because they really don't have to. I would still try moving the Time Tracking section above the Dates, which seem less needed to me. I would still definitely give a vote to a tad smaller fonts. Otherwise it is good to see that I might be able to upgrade when this is out. What's presented here is already acceptable.
          Hide
          Mike Curwen added a comment -

          It's amazing sometimes how less (line height) is more (acceptance). That makes a huge difference in just the section you've shown. I hope there's similar tightening up in the attachments and linked issues. I'm encouraged by what I'm seeing, truly.

          Can I mention three things?
          1) I'd also be in favour of slightly smaller fonts. I never did find them hard to read at their former size, and if I ever did, I know how to make my browser zoom them in. Of course, that same technique can make fonts smaller. But, as we know, pages are laid out and made to look good, with certain 'native' font size(s) in mind. Even shrinking the font on JAC, it just seems to leave a lot more whitespace, and there was already too much.

          2) About the comments. I also hope there's a nice dark line between each comment. I suppose the shaded background cell (that for comments, extended across the page) is a dying UI convention, so I don't actually hold out much hope of ever seeing it again in JIRA. I suppose it would only just stick out like a sore thumb, if it were included in the comments section. But if you'll allow me to harp on it for just a bit...

          When I'm looking at an issue with lots of comments, and I'm using the mouse scroll wheel to quickly scan down, with the former (pre 4.1) thick delineation between each comment, even though they're scrolling by in a blur, I have some sense of the 'velocity' of comments. I never knew how much I unconsciously noticed it, until it was just a 1px line, and then I had no idea how many comments went by. To say nothing of just being able to see, clearly and without any effort at all, the individual comments on a static, non-scrolling page.

          The other thing it seemed to do (for my eyes) is make who is making the comment stand out very much, from the comment itself. Because the person making the comment was included in an underlined font, on top of that shaded background, and it was blue, and the date was a smaller font. Now, I've just got "it's blue".

          So those two things were cues to me. "Hmm, let's see it's about 20 comments down (velocity cue), and it's by so-and-so (name pops).

          3) My last point is present in both the comment header, as well as in the whole argument about hiding links behind buttons. The name only underlines when I hover over it which is for two reasons a) no underline makes it less 'different' than the rest of that text and b) it's not immediately apparent just by looking, that it is a link. To me, the old fogey, this is UI 101 stuff. Why hide that text is a link? Oh yes, it was all the rage for a while, and (gulp) I've even done it. But in my dottage, I just think it makes stuff harder. To say nothing of actually hiding the links entirely (like the Edit, Delete, Permalink stuff) until you hover over an area that you didn't know you could hover over. I suppose it makes things look clean. That implies the old look is 'dirty', and I just disagree on principal. Functional != dirty. Anyway, this particular point is not going to be won on its merits, because there's big disagreements about the merits. I will instead finish with a personal anecdote.

          My mom and dad used to fight about the kitchen counter. Dad wanted it bare. Mom would leave the toaster and the blender and the cutting board and the coffee grinder (and every other small appliance) out on top. Stuff would get put away (hidden). Stuff would get pulled back out. It was put away again. Finally it was "make your own d*mn toast then!". The toaster stayed out.

          But yes, the summary is that I think you're moving in the right direction, and thank you. If nothing else, by giving almost immediate feedback, we're proving to Atlassian that we're definitely watching.

          Show
          Mike Curwen added a comment - It's amazing sometimes how less (line height) is more (acceptance). That makes a huge difference in just the section you've shown. I hope there's similar tightening up in the attachments and linked issues. I'm encouraged by what I'm seeing, truly. Can I mention three things? 1) I'd also be in favour of slightly smaller fonts. I never did find them hard to read at their former size, and if I ever did, I know how to make my browser zoom them in. Of course, that same technique can make fonts smaller. But, as we know, pages are laid out and made to look good, with certain 'native' font size(s) in mind. Even shrinking the font on JAC, it just seems to leave a lot more whitespace, and there was already too much. 2) About the comments. I also hope there's a nice dark line between each comment. I suppose the shaded background cell (that for comments, extended across the page) is a dying UI convention, so I don't actually hold out much hope of ever seeing it again in JIRA. I suppose it would only just stick out like a sore thumb, if it were included in the comments section. But if you'll allow me to harp on it for just a bit... When I'm looking at an issue with lots of comments, and I'm using the mouse scroll wheel to quickly scan down, with the former (pre 4.1) thick delineation between each comment, even though they're scrolling by in a blur, I have some sense of the 'velocity' of comments. I never knew how much I unconsciously noticed it, until it was just a 1px line, and then I had no idea how many comments went by. To say nothing of just being able to see, clearly and without any effort at all , the individual comments on a static, non-scrolling page. The other thing it seemed to do (for my eyes) is make who is making the comment stand out very much, from the comment itself. Because the person making the comment was included in an underlined font, on top of that shaded background, and it was blue, and the date was a smaller font. Now, I've just got "it's blue". So those two things were cues to me. "Hmm, let's see it's about 20 comments down (velocity cue), and it's by so-and-so (name pops). 3) My last point is present in both the comment header, as well as in the whole argument about hiding links behind buttons. The name only underlines when I hover over it which is for two reasons a) no underline makes it less 'different' than the rest of that text and b) it's not immediately apparent just by looking, that it is a link. To me, the old fogey, this is UI 101 stuff. Why hide that text is a link? Oh yes, it was all the rage for a while, and (gulp) I've even done it. But in my dottage, I just think it makes stuff harder. To say nothing of actually hiding the links entirely (like the Edit, Delete, Permalink stuff) until you hover over an area that you didn't know you could hover over. I suppose it makes things look clean. That implies the old look is 'dirty', and I just disagree on principal. Functional != dirty. Anyway, this particular point is not going to be won on its merits, because there's big disagreements about the merits. I will instead finish with a personal anecdote. My mom and dad used to fight about the kitchen counter. Dad wanted it bare. Mom would leave the toaster and the blender and the cutting board and the coffee grinder (and every other small appliance) out on top. Stuff would get put away (hidden). Stuff would get pulled back out. It was put away again. Finally it was "make your own d*mn toast then!". The toaster stayed out. But yes, the summary is that I think you're moving in the right direction, and thank you. If nothing else, by giving almost immediate feedback, we're proving to Atlassian that we're definitely watching.
          Hide
          Gili added a comment -

          I agree with everything Mike wrong except for the reduced line spacing. I tend to believe that using smaller fonts should be sufficient while reducing the line spacing makes the text look "cluttered".

          I must say that I am very encouraged by what I see in the new screenshots. I believe there is enough there for me to seriously evaluate version 4.2. Thank you for listening!

          Show
          Gili added a comment - I agree with everything Mike wrong except for the reduced line spacing. I tend to believe that using smaller fonts should be sufficient while reducing the line spacing makes the text look "cluttered". I must say that I am very encouraged by what I see in the new screenshots. I believe there is enough there for me to seriously evaluate version 4.2. Thank you for listening!
          Hide
          mck added a comment -

          A decent improvement.

          Remaining issues in my opinion:

          • too much "bounce" when scrolling to read comments, and as mentioned above awkward to scroll fast,
          • can't collapse sections and/or issue links should be above attachments,
          • needs to have a smaller font
          • too much whitespace. can the people and dates sections stick in their position (given they completely fit on the screen to begin with) or can the comments extend to the right underneath people and dates. (see attached pdf).

          While the improvement is a decent first step and it's positive that Atlassian is listening and reacting, i'm still failing to see any benefits of the redesign. But the royal fuckup here has already been done: the UI should never have been so drastically changed in a minor version; and i hope that Atlassian have learnt "Don't #@!% the Customer".

          Show
          mck added a comment - A decent improvement. Remaining issues in my opinion: too much "bounce" when scrolling to read comments, and as mentioned above awkward to scroll fast, can't collapse sections and/or issue links should be above attachments, needs to have a smaller font too much whitespace. can the people and dates sections stick in their position (given they completely fit on the screen to begin with) or can the comments extend to the right underneath people and dates. (see attached pdf). While the improvement is a decent first step and it's positive that Atlassian is listening and reacting, i'm still failing to see any benefits of the redesign. But the royal fuckup here has already been done: the UI should never have been so drastically changed in a minor version; and i hope that Atlassian have learnt "Don't #@!% the Customer".
          Hide
          hugo lassiege added a comment -

          Interresting but I'll wait to try it. It's always better to test for a true feedback.

          And I'm waiting for the improvement on attachments, links, subtasks and comments that wastes a lot of space.

          Show
          hugo lassiege added a comment - Interresting but I'll wait to try it. It's always better to test for a true feedback. And I'm waiting for the improvement on attachments, links, subtasks and comments that wastes a lot of space.
          Hide
          Andy Brook (Javahollic Software) added a comment -

          The demarcation indicated in the screenshots is welcome, but I do keep staring at the 4" whitespace gap to the right, which is entirely wasted for 90% of the height of the issue, and makes reading stack traces a pain. Comments really do need to 'stretch' over and take up available space, is this on the cards for the next release?

          Show
          Andy Brook (Javahollic Software) added a comment - The demarcation indicated in the screenshots is welcome, but I do keep staring at the 4" whitespace gap to the right, which is entirely wasted for 90% of the height of the issue, and makes reading stack traces a pain. Comments really do need to 'stretch' over and take up available space, is this on the cards for the next release?
          Hide
          Brett Ryan added a comment -

          I would also like to say the improvements look great. I'd prefer the font sizes to remain the way they are, I have bad eyes and smaller fonts are harder to rea. Maybe have a user pref for font sizes as zooming with the browser always screws proportions.

          Keep up the great work.

          Show
          Brett Ryan added a comment - I would also like to say the improvements look great. I'd prefer the font sizes to remain the way they are, I have bad eyes and smaller fonts are harder to rea. Maybe have a user pref for font sizes as zooming with the browser always screws proportions. Keep up the great work.
          Hide
          Chris Cralle added a comment -

          I thought one of the primary goals of the new UI was to allow customization and templates?
          Why is there not a way for us to modify the style of the page more easily? Will the new UI ever be customizable from Administrator?

          Not holding my breath for 4.2

          Show
          Chris Cralle added a comment - I thought one of the primary goals of the new UI was to allow customization and templates? Why is there not a way for us to modify the style of the page more easily? Will the new UI ever be customizable from Administrator? Not holding my breath for 4.2
          Hide
          Application Services added a comment -

          I agree the new screen shots look much better than the old, 4.1 UI.

          If that look is implemented I think it's something my organization can consider updating to.

          Thanks for listening!

          Show
          Application Services added a comment - I agree the new screen shots look much better than the old, 4.1 UI. If that look is implemented I think it's something my organization can consider updating to. Thanks for listening!
          Hide
          Chris Brookins added a comment -

          Better however 1 small change could make it even better.
          I'd like to see the field labels e.g. 'Affects Version/s:' be more visually distinguishable from the values of those fields. Right now the only different between field labels and their values is that labels are just SLIGHTLY a lighter gray than the values which are black. They need to be MUCH more distinguishable. That way I can easily scan for the field label I want and then read it's value. Right now they are so similar scanning is tough and it looks like a sea of text.

          Show
          Chris Brookins added a comment - Better however 1 small change could make it even better. I'd like to see the field labels e.g. 'Affects Version/s:' be more visually distinguishable from the values of those fields. Right now the only different between field labels and their values is that labels are just SLIGHTLY a lighter gray than the values which are black. They need to be MUCH more distinguishable. That way I can easily scan for the field label I want and then read it's value. Right now they are so similar scanning is tough and it looks like a sea of text.
          Hide
          Alex Holtz added a comment -

          Edwin,

          These changes look like a good step in the right direction, thank you for sharing this.

          The JIRA 3.x/4.0.x UI made excellent use of larger screen resolutions by giving the description/comment fields a lot of extra horizontal space. This screenshot shows the layout for the minimum supported resolution, but if it scales at all like the current 4.1 UI a large percentage of the extra real estate offered by larger screens goes directly into (as wasted whitespace) the right-hand details (People, Dates) rather than to the description/comment fields. Can width-locking that section be looked at?

          Show
          Alex Holtz added a comment - Edwin, These changes look like a good step in the right direction, thank you for sharing this. The JIRA 3.x/4.0.x UI made excellent use of larger screen resolutions by giving the description/comment fields a lot of extra horizontal space. This screenshot shows the layout for the minimum supported resolution, but if it scales at all like the current 4.1 UI a large percentage of the extra real estate offered by larger screens goes directly into (as wasted whitespace) the right-hand details (People, Dates) rather than to the description/comment fields. Can width-locking that section be looked at?
          Hide
          werner mueller added a comment -

          well the comments did never fill 100% of the width. jira 4.0 has the navigation bar on the left side. but as the navigation bar was removed and put into menus and buttons to save some space that is not used now.

          in fact those buttons on top are one of the larger issues compared to the font size. the fact that they stay on top is very nice.
          but in the old design i could just stare at the gui to find the link/action i was looking for.
          in the new version i have to browse the menus if i cant remember. and having the workflow actions as buttons beside each other while some are moved in a menu... what can i say i dont like it at all. it is a bit random what actions end up in the menu. surely the important ones are always visible right? and workflow actions in german have sometimes long names - they dont fit if put side by side. below each other was the better solution.

          and talking about drama queens...
          if we have 50 - 150 people we need to talk with for about one hour or two where things have moved: that causes some cost. and those people i talked with about the new issue screen dont like it or might live with it. sorry but there are cheaper solutions 'to just live with'...

          and to come back to the original proposal in this improvement: it asks to make the UI a choice. I still prefer the old gui over an improved new one.
          (of course if new new-new ui just convinces me on the first sight you will find me corrected and never talk about the 4.0 again)

          until then: give people a choice when to do that step.

          Show
          werner mueller added a comment - well the comments did never fill 100% of the width. jira 4.0 has the navigation bar on the left side. but as the navigation bar was removed and put into menus and buttons to save some space that is not used now. in fact those buttons on top are one of the larger issues compared to the font size. the fact that they stay on top is very nice. but in the old design i could just stare at the gui to find the link/action i was looking for. in the new version i have to browse the menus if i cant remember. and having the workflow actions as buttons beside each other while some are moved in a menu... what can i say i dont like it at all. it is a bit random what actions end up in the menu. surely the important ones are always visible right? and workflow actions in german have sometimes long names - they dont fit if put side by side. below each other was the better solution. and talking about drama queens... if we have 50 - 150 people we need to talk with for about one hour or two where things have moved: that causes some cost. and those people i talked with about the new issue screen dont like it or might live with it. sorry but there are cheaper solutions 'to just live with'... and to come back to the original proposal in this improvement: it asks to make the UI a choice. I still prefer the old gui over an improved new one. (of course if new new-new ui just convinces me on the first sight you will find me corrected and never talk about the 4.0 again) until then: give people a choice when to do that step.
          Hide
          Mike Miller added a comment -

          How does Jira 4.1 handle descriptions and comments that are too wide to be displayed on the screen?

          In jira 4.0 with the nav panel on the left, when someone pastes in something too wide in the description it just causes Jira to grow to the right in order to accommodate it.

          What happens in 4.1/4.2? Will it push the right side nav bar off the screen, making it necessary to scroll to find, or will it enforce some kind of forced word wrap on the offending elements?

          I would much prefer a forced wrap, there is no need for any element to go off the right hand side of the screen.

          Show
          Mike Miller added a comment - How does Jira 4.1 handle descriptions and comments that are too wide to be displayed on the screen? In jira 4.0 with the nav panel on the left, when someone pastes in something too wide in the description it just causes Jira to grow to the right in order to accommodate it. What happens in 4.1/4.2? Will it push the right side nav bar off the screen, making it necessary to scroll to find, or will it enforce some kind of forced word wrap on the offending elements? I would much prefer a forced wrap, there is no need for any element to go off the right hand side of the screen.
          Hide
          Brett Ryan added a comment -

          @werner mueller - I have to disagree that the old interface was easier to find the actions. I found they were always scattered over the navigation bar, if they were in a list form then it would have been easier to find. I now find the new interface much easier to find the actions as they're always under "More Actions". I think it's the same as the debate with Office 2010, the ribbon IMHO is harder to find actions than in menus.

          @Mike Miller - It pushes the right off the screen, this is problematic for me as I do not maximise my browser window as I have tunnel vision and find it easier to read browsers of smaller with, now the minimum requirement for a browser width is > 1000px wide, my normal browser window is 800 or so wide forcing me to now use a larger browser size causing me to have to move my head left to right to read content (my head is usually 3" away from the screen).

          Show
          Brett Ryan added a comment - @werner mueller - I have to disagree that the old interface was easier to find the actions. I found they were always scattered over the navigation bar, if they were in a list form then it would have been easier to find. I now find the new interface much easier to find the actions as they're always under "More Actions". I think it's the same as the debate with Office 2010, the ribbon IMHO is harder to find actions than in menus. @Mike Miller - It pushes the right off the screen, this is problematic for me as I do not maximise my browser window as I have tunnel vision and find it easier to read browsers of smaller with, now the minimum requirement for a browser width is > 1000px wide, my normal browser window is 800 or so wide forcing me to now use a larger browser size causing me to have to move my head left to right to read content (my head is usually 3" away from the screen).
          Hide
          Mike Miller added a comment - - edited

          Thanks Brett. This is a major d'oh for me as well. My users like to paste emails, stack traces and log snippets into fields causing them to explode in this way. While I would rather they upload anything large as an attachment, users are lazy.

          With the old layout, with the nav bar on the right, this isnt too much of a big deal. It just means that the extra stuff that should be wrapped extends off to the right into oblivion. The important stuff in the nav bar is preserved since it is the first thing displayed.

          This is not to say that I am against having the nav bar on the right. This seems to preserve some whitespace that would have just been wasted anyhow. If there was some way to deal with fields that are "too wide", I think we would be in good shape.

          Also, I like the proposals for the fixed 4.2 layout. While I would prefer this to be customizable, this is at least a step in the right direction.

          Show
          Mike Miller added a comment - - edited Thanks Brett. This is a major d'oh for me as well. My users like to paste emails, stack traces and log snippets into fields causing them to explode in this way. While I would rather they upload anything large as an attachment, users are lazy. With the old layout, with the nav bar on the right, this isnt too much of a big deal. It just means that the extra stuff that should be wrapped extends off to the right into oblivion. The important stuff in the nav bar is preserved since it is the first thing displayed. This is not to say that I am against having the nav bar on the right. This seems to preserve some whitespace that would have just been wasted anyhow. If there was some way to deal with fields that are "too wide", I think we would be in good shape. Also, I like the proposals for the fixed 4.2 layout. While I would prefer this to be customizable, this is at least a step in the right direction.
          Hide
          Audra Eng [Atlassian] added a comment -

          We're thrilled to hear that the changes we are making seem to be headed in the right direction. We want to follow up on some comments made recently

          @Mike Curwen

          1. Reducing font size is something we're going to tackle after 4.2 since it will take some considerable design review as it changes the L&F causing more white space to deal with.

          2. Your use case for delineation between each comment and who is making the comment makes sense, thanks for providing the detail. We'll investigate and consider changing this for a release after 4.2.

          3. Thanks for the story about your parents struggle over the kitchen counter - it's a good analogy. We do have internal debates on clean and hidden with hover links/text versus providing static text cues on what certain buttons/icons do. We just want JIRA to be the best issue tracker that you enjoy using every day - so we'll take a look at improving those areas you pointed out as well.

          Also, FYI - the line height changes should be across the board for the view issue page so we are doing some tightening there. We'll show more extensive screenshots soon.

          @Andy Brook, @ Alex Holtz

          Several folks have mentioned the wasted white space under People and Dates and wanting more real estate to comments/description. This is a fairly substantial change in the UI that we'll have to consider for after 4.2 which we're wrapping up. We've talked about this before with design, and it's not an easy fix. The reason is that we cannot have a 2 "column" layout that then turns back to 1 "column" without having a big white hole somewhere. Also, the varying lengths of these sections make it hard to predetermine at which stage we can "switch" to 1 column. Our thinking is really to give people the option to configure their own layout and determine which section goes where, similar to our dashboard gadget placement. Do you think this might solve your issue?

          @Chris Cralle

          Customizing UI and templates aren't in 4.2, but a common feature request. We want the default UI to be usable by the majority of folks for the most common use cases first, and then we'll consider adding the ability to customize the UI in the future.

          You can customize L&F (colors, fonts, etc). Heading and links are (and have been) customizable. Also, while not optimal, you can also change the css today if there are certain things you want to customize.

          @Chris Brookins

          What would you suggest for distinguishing the values and labels better? We've gone around heaps on this last week and are finding it hard to come up with something better. What colors would you use for the labels vs the value?

          @Werner mueller, @Mck Semb Wever
          We hear your frustration - we're trying to balance a new UI design and speed of delivery. Our goal is for customers to find the new UI easy to navigate and useful, as well as clean and modern without clutter and complexity. As mentioned in the official status - we will not be offering the old UI as an option. We're driving hard to make this UI work better than the old one and will work to ensure wide customer feedback is taken before releasing new UI changes.

          @Mike Miller, @Brett Ryan
          Long descriptions won't push out the screen once you hit the minimum recommended resolution of 1024 width. Descriptions will always wrap. The only exception is if you use wiki markup for panels (e.g. {noformat}) in which case we won't enforce wrap, but you get a horizontal scroll bar within the panel.

          Edwin
          JIRA Product Management

          Audra
          VP, Product Management

          Show
          Audra Eng [Atlassian] added a comment - We're thrilled to hear that the changes we are making seem to be headed in the right direction. We want to follow up on some comments made recently @Mike Curwen 1. Reducing font size is something we're going to tackle after 4.2 since it will take some considerable design review as it changes the L&F causing more white space to deal with. 2. Your use case for delineation between each comment and who is making the comment makes sense, thanks for providing the detail. We'll investigate and consider changing this for a release after 4.2. 3. Thanks for the story about your parents struggle over the kitchen counter - it's a good analogy. We do have internal debates on clean and hidden with hover links/text versus providing static text cues on what certain buttons/icons do. We just want JIRA to be the best issue tracker that you enjoy using every day - so we'll take a look at improving those areas you pointed out as well. Also, FYI - the line height changes should be across the board for the view issue page so we are doing some tightening there. We'll show more extensive screenshots soon. @Andy Brook, @ Alex Holtz Several folks have mentioned the wasted white space under People and Dates and wanting more real estate to comments/description. This is a fairly substantial change in the UI that we'll have to consider for after 4.2 which we're wrapping up. We've talked about this before with design, and it's not an easy fix. The reason is that we cannot have a 2 "column" layout that then turns back to 1 "column" without having a big white hole somewhere. Also, the varying lengths of these sections make it hard to predetermine at which stage we can "switch" to 1 column. Our thinking is really to give people the option to configure their own layout and determine which section goes where, similar to our dashboard gadget placement. Do you think this might solve your issue? @Chris Cralle Customizing UI and templates aren't in 4.2, but a common feature request. We want the default UI to be usable by the majority of folks for the most common use cases first, and then we'll consider adding the ability to customize the UI in the future. You can customize L&F (colors, fonts, etc). Heading and links are (and have been) customizable. Also, while not optimal, you can also change the css today if there are certain things you want to customize. @Chris Brookins What would you suggest for distinguishing the values and labels better? We've gone around heaps on this last week and are finding it hard to come up with something better. What colors would you use for the labels vs the value? @Werner mueller, @Mck Semb Wever We hear your frustration - we're trying to balance a new UI design and speed of delivery. Our goal is for customers to find the new UI easy to navigate and useful, as well as clean and modern without clutter and complexity. As mentioned in the official status - we will not be offering the old UI as an option. We're driving hard to make this UI work better than the old one and will work to ensure wide customer feedback is taken before releasing new UI changes. @Mike Miller, @Brett Ryan Long descriptions won't push out the screen once you hit the minimum recommended resolution of 1024 width. Descriptions will always wrap. The only exception is if you use wiki markup for panels (e.g. {noformat}) in which case we won't enforce wrap, but you get a horizontal scroll bar within the panel. Edwin JIRA Product Management Audra VP, Product Management
          Hide
          Brett Ryan added a comment -

          Thanks Audra, you mention the minimum recomended width is 1024, why so wide? can it be more like 800? I have great difficulty with pages wider than 800 due to lack of peripheral vision.

          Show
          Brett Ryan added a comment - Thanks Audra, you mention the minimum recomended width is 1024, why so wide? can it be more like 800? I have great difficulty with pages wider than 800 due to lack of peripheral vision.
          Hide
          Mike Miller added a comment -

          @Audra: Good news, this is perfect for me. If my users are unhappy with the wrap, maybe they will follow my original suggestion and get the stuff into attachments. I am fine 1024 as a minimum. Though I would keep in mind that for this to be useful you would need a 1280 width screen, as Jira cant assume it has use of the full width of the screen. For instance, the tabs or bookmarks on the side of the screen take up between 200 and 250 px on average.

          The layout works great on my 1280 screen, but would require a 1024 screen to be at fullscreen with no sidebars. Someone with an 800 screen would be out of luck and need to scroll just to see the nav bar. (maybe a floating navbar? that might cause even more headaches)

          I would rather a configurable minimum, but that would cause undue havoc and would probably need to be rolled into a request for a completely configurable UI.

          Though an 800 minimum would be pretty easy to accomplish if the you could set the Details box as a single column of fields instead of being fixed at 2.

          Show
          Mike Miller added a comment - @Audra: Good news, this is perfect for me. If my users are unhappy with the wrap, maybe they will follow my original suggestion and get the stuff into attachments. I am fine 1024 as a minimum. Though I would keep in mind that for this to be useful you would need a 1280 width screen, as Jira cant assume it has use of the full width of the screen. For instance, the tabs or bookmarks on the side of the screen take up between 200 and 250 px on average. The layout works great on my 1280 screen, but would require a 1024 screen to be at fullscreen with no sidebars. Someone with an 800 screen would be out of luck and need to scroll just to see the nav bar. (maybe a floating navbar? that might cause even more headaches) I would rather a configurable minimum, but that would cause undue havoc and would probably need to be rolled into a request for a completely configurable UI. Though an 800 minimum would be pretty easy to accomplish if the you could set the Details box as a single column of fields instead of being fixed at 2.
          Hide
          Holger Schimanski added a comment -

          I recommend, that the description, comments and other text fields should not use more than 1000px width.

          Text is much more readable, when the width of the text column is not too big. Line break after ~1000px width is useful and increases readability.

          Show
          Holger Schimanski added a comment - I recommend, that the description, comments and other text fields should not use more than 1000px width. Text is much more readable, when the width of the text column is not too big. Line break after ~1000px width is useful and increases readability.
          Hide
          Edwin Wong [Atlassian] added a comment -

          @Brett

          I completely understand where you are coming from about the resolution of the screen. Unfortunately for us, this comes down to a compromise. We have the choice to optimize the viewing experience for our diverse set of customers. In this case, our studies indicate to us that most users these days have screen resolutions of at least 1024 (mostly more) pixels, and our design team has worked to optimize based on that choice.

          Regardless, is there anything in particular that is not working for you at the 800px resolution?

          @Brett, @Mike, @Holger

          No guarantees about if or when we ship this, but one idea that we've been bouncing around that may help with the width challenges on this page is to allow customization of the layout of the page. For example, being about to choose a 2 column, or single column layout. What do you think about that? Would you use a feature like that?

          Show
          Edwin Wong [Atlassian] added a comment - @Brett I completely understand where you are coming from about the resolution of the screen. Unfortunately for us, this comes down to a compromise. We have the choice to optimize the viewing experience for our diverse set of customers. In this case, our studies indicate to us that most users these days have screen resolutions of at least 1024 (mostly more) pixels, and our design team has worked to optimize based on that choice. Regardless, is there anything in particular that is not working for you at the 800px resolution? @Brett, @Mike, @Holger No guarantees about if or when we ship this, but one idea that we've been bouncing around that may help with the width challenges on this page is to allow customization of the layout of the page. For example, being about to choose a 2 column, or single column layout. What do you think about that? Would you use a feature like that?
          Hide
          Tom Moore added a comment -

          Layout customization would be great. At least we can move the ticket info from the right side back to the left, and make the transition from 3.x to 4.x easier on our users.

          Show
          Tom Moore added a comment - Layout customization would be great. At least we can move the ticket info from the right side back to the left, and make the transition from 3.x to 4.x easier on our users.
          Hide
          Thorsten Deuter added a comment -

          Yes being able to move areas around like you can with gadgets on the dashboard would be helpful.

          Show
          Thorsten Deuter added a comment - Yes being able to move areas around like you can with gadgets on the dashboard would be helpful.
          Hide
          Mike Miller added a comment -

          Edwin, this sounds good to me, thanks. Though my #1 concern is performance; as long as this doesn't wreck performance, go for it.

          Show
          Mike Miller added a comment - Edwin, this sounds good to me, thanks. Though my #1 concern is performance; as long as this doesn't wreck performance, go for it.
          Hide
          Shaun M. Underhill added a comment -

          I fully agree with Mike. If performance can stay at the same level, I would welcome the ability to move areas around on the View Issue screen.

          Show
          Shaun M. Underhill added a comment - I fully agree with Mike. If performance can stay at the same level, I would welcome the ability to move areas around on the View Issue screen.
          Hide
          Mark Liedtke added a comment -

          Just wanted to add my $0.02...I really like the screenshots and am glad to see Atlassian actively listening to the comments of the users.

          As for making the View Issue screen "gadgettized," I think it sounds like a good idea in concept, but I am fearful that it will cause a performance hit when scrolling through issues. After upgrading from 3.13 to 4.1 I noticed a huge lag in dashboards loading, and don't want to have that same lag on issues. So before going all gung-ho in "gagettizing" the view issue page, make sure that all the performance issues with gadgets are taken care of.

          Show
          Mark Liedtke added a comment - Just wanted to add my $0.02...I really like the screenshots and am glad to see Atlassian actively listening to the comments of the users. As for making the View Issue screen "gadgettized," I think it sounds like a good idea in concept, but I am fearful that it will cause a performance hit when scrolling through issues. After upgrading from 3.13 to 4.1 I noticed a huge lag in dashboards loading, and don't want to have that same lag on issues. So before going all gung-ho in "gagettizing" the view issue page, make sure that all the performance issues with gadgets are taken care of.
          Hide
          Brett Ryan added a comment -

          Dates and people on the right IMHO is best on right, I don't want to have to scroll to the right all the time just to see comments and description but can cope when it's dates and people on the right.

          Don't make it gadget based as this will kill performance, instead control it through CSS or velocity templates that have a dynamic option reading a setting in user preferences. Sure, you don't get the pretty drag and drop UI layout, but is it even needed? It takes my dashboard 20 seconds to load as it is, I painfully live with that but in will not accept the issue screen taking similar hits.

          Show
          Brett Ryan added a comment - Dates and people on the right IMHO is best on right, I don't want to have to scroll to the right all the time just to see comments and description but can cope when it's dates and people on the right. Don't make it gadget based as this will kill performance, instead control it through CSS or velocity templates that have a dynamic option reading a setting in user preferences. Sure, you don't get the pretty drag and drop UI layout, but is it even needed? It takes my dashboard 20 seconds to load as it is, I painfully live with that but in will not accept the issue screen taking similar hits.
          Hide
          Thorsten Deuter added a comment - - edited

          I don't think that the performance problem on the dashboard is due to the dragability of the gadgets but is from the gadgets itself requesting, loading and processing their filter data. But in fact I don't know and of course I want Atlassian to ensure performance to the same level they do QA on functionality (I hope they do

          But I also agree that drag&drop is not essential. Customizing the issue view via user preferences is ok. To begin with: Fontsizes (different ones for labels and contents) same with font color, then defining the thickness and color of seperator lines and box frames plus background colors of areas.

          Show
          Thorsten Deuter added a comment - - edited I don't think that the performance problem on the dashboard is due to the dragability of the gadgets but is from the gadgets itself requesting, loading and processing their filter data. But in fact I don't know and of course I want Atlassian to ensure performance to the same level they do QA on functionality (I hope they do But I also agree that drag&drop is not essential. Customizing the issue view via user preferences is ok. To begin with: Fontsizes (different ones for labels and contents) same with font color, then defining the thickness and color of seperator lines and box frames plus background colors of areas.
          Hide
          Mike Miller added a comment -

          I agree with Thorsten. In my mind the dashboard performance "problems" in 4.0 where mostly due to slower user machines. Instead of getting a pre-rendered page, they got a page full of asynchronously loaded gadgets. A powerful machine could load them all at once and show a significant increase in performance. A slower single core windows based machine (such as most of my users) would end up multitasking and taking significantly longer to load.

          As long as the issues page is fully pre-rendered with no lazy-loading elements, I think a partially or even a full customized view would not add any performance hit at all.

          Show
          Mike Miller added a comment - I agree with Thorsten. In my mind the dashboard performance "problems" in 4.0 where mostly due to slower user machines. Instead of getting a pre-rendered page, they got a page full of asynchronously loaded gadgets. A powerful machine could load them all at once and show a significant increase in performance. A slower single core windows based machine (such as most of my users) would end up multitasking and taking significantly longer to load. As long as the issues page is fully pre-rendered with no lazy-loading elements, I think a partially or even a full customized view would not add any performance hit at all.
          Hide
          Brett Ryan added a comment -

          @Mike - that is incorrect, I don't want to get off topic, but the performance is attributed to the amount of concurrent network connections the browser will allow at one time not so much the performance of the client, IE for example only allows 2 concurrent connections for HTTP 1.1. This is also shared amongst the whole browser, not per tab. I have a core 2 duo 3.0+8GB RAM and it still takes ~20 seconds for the dashboard to load with ~6 gadgets on an intranet machine.

          Having said this, I agree that if it's pre-rendered then this will be fine, which is why I suggest configurable static options rather than D&D components, it's also a simple addition IMHO as it can be controlled via CSS or via Velocity template conditions.

          Ultimately an extension theme for CSS that we could place in the edit-webapp directory would be a valid approach, though this would be a global thing and users couldn't configure it, either way I'd live with either.

          Show
          Brett Ryan added a comment - @Mike - that is incorrect, I don't want to get off topic, but the performance is attributed to the amount of concurrent network connections the browser will allow at one time not so much the performance of the client, IE for example only allows 2 concurrent connections for HTTP 1.1. This is also shared amongst the whole browser, not per tab. I have a core 2 duo 3.0+8GB RAM and it still takes ~20 seconds for the dashboard to load with ~6 gadgets on an intranet machine. Having said this, I agree that if it's pre-rendered then this will be fine, which is why I suggest configurable static options rather than D&D components, it's also a simple addition IMHO as it can be controlled via CSS or via Velocity template conditions. Ultimately an extension theme for CSS that we could place in the edit-webapp directory would be a valid approach, though this would be a global thing and users couldn't configure it, either way I'd live with either.
          Hide
          Kavian Moradhassel added a comment -

          I'm coming to this issue late, and reading all the comments caused me to glaze over a bit. However, I do like the proposed changes for 4.2, although I'm not sure the lines between each custom field is such a great idea...I'm in the midst of deploying an issue type configuration with about 30 custom fields spread across a few tabs, and I'm not sure having lines between every field is really going to work. But we'll see, I suppose...

          Unlike many of the original commenters, I've loved the 4.1 looked right from day one. I was a relatively new JIRA user when 4.1 was released, and I'd not been a big fan of the action links being all down the left-hand side (I don't like having to scroll to do things like log work).

          Other than stuff that's already dealt with in 4.2, the one thing I'd like to see is the right-hand column being used a little more...I find on most issues, the right-hand column ends somewhere around the start of the Comments, and then it's just wasted white space for the rest of the height of the issue. I liked the idea someone suggested to move the attachments to the right-hand side...this might also be a good place for trackbacks.

          Show
          Kavian Moradhassel added a comment - I'm coming to this issue late, and reading all the comments caused me to glaze over a bit. However, I do like the proposed changes for 4.2, although I'm not sure the lines between each custom field is such a great idea...I'm in the midst of deploying an issue type configuration with about 30 custom fields spread across a few tabs, and I'm not sure having lines between every field is really going to work. But we'll see, I suppose... Unlike many of the original commenters, I've loved the 4.1 looked right from day one. I was a relatively new JIRA user when 4.1 was released, and I'd not been a big fan of the action links being all down the left-hand side (I don't like having to scroll to do things like log work). Other than stuff that's already dealt with in 4.2, the one thing I'd like to see is the right-hand column being used a little more...I find on most issues, the right-hand column ends somewhere around the start of the Comments, and then it's just wasted white space for the rest of the height of the issue. I liked the idea someone suggested to move the attachments to the right-hand side...this might also be a good place for trackbacks.
          Hide
          Kavian Moradhassel added a comment -

          One other thing I've noticed...when using tabs to split up custom views, switching between tabs causes the content under the custom fields section to bounce around like a yoyo. I think it would be better to have the custom fields stay at a fixed height (i.e. the highest tab), and it would be useful to have some kind of visual separator between the tabs and the rest of the issue...this could be done with a slight background shading, although the more prominent top border of the Description field shown in the 4.2 screenshot may be sufficient.

          Show
          Kavian Moradhassel added a comment - One other thing I've noticed...when using tabs to split up custom views, switching between tabs causes the content under the custom fields section to bounce around like a yoyo. I think it would be better to have the custom fields stay at a fixed height (i.e. the highest tab), and it would be useful to have some kind of visual separator between the tabs and the rest of the issue...this could be done with a slight background shading, although the more prominent top border of the Description field shown in the 4.2 screenshot may be sufficient.
          Hide
          Nick Menere [Atlassian] added a comment -

          Hi guys,
          Just wanted to alleviate fears that we would be moving to gadgets for the view issue page. At no stage has anyone within the JIRA Team even suggested that we use gadgets for a configurable view issue page. The power of gadgets lie in their shareable and distributable nature, things which are not needed in the view issue page. View issue needs speed, usability and clarity.

          The performance of gadgets (something that we aren't happy with either) should be left for a discussion on another issue.

          Cheers,
          Nick Menere
          JIRA UX Tech Lead

          Show
          Nick Menere [Atlassian] added a comment - Hi guys, Just wanted to alleviate fears that we would be moving to gadgets for the view issue page. At no stage has anyone within the JIRA Team even suggested that we use gadgets for a configurable view issue page. The power of gadgets lie in their shareable and distributable nature, things which are not needed in the view issue page. View issue needs speed, usability and clarity. The performance of gadgets (something that we aren't happy with either) should be left for a discussion on another issue. Cheers, Nick Menere JIRA UX Tech Lead
          Hide
          John Heller added a comment -

          Re: the discussion on view issue layouts:-

          At least one of our Jira projects has a lot of custom fields, and the long table of fields is a waste of screen real estate - especially with the 4.1 line spacing. Even with the old UI, we use tabs to provide some logical grouping and to reduce the page length.

          As already noted, using "gadgets" would prove unacceptable for performance reasons. The option of a one or two column layout would be a substantial improvement, especially if this can be chosen on a per-tab basis. That is, one tab could have a single column layout, while another might have two columns.

          The best of all would be to be able to group fields into collapsible sections, consistent with the proposed 4.2 UI. Each section could have a heading and a choice of one or two column layouts. This would allow considerable layout flexibility and control, while hopefully maintaining reasonable performance. This type of collapsible section grouping would be useful even without the two column option.

          Another thing we would like to see is some control over the placement of the Description field. Presently it always comes after custom fields and often requires scrolling to view. A simple option to chose a before or after placement would help. Better yet, let us choose its position amongst the collapsible sections suggested above. This would provide a consistent UI and very nice layout control.

          Show
          John Heller added a comment - Re: the discussion on view issue layouts:- At least one of our Jira projects has a lot of custom fields, and the long table of fields is a waste of screen real estate - especially with the 4.1 line spacing. Even with the old UI, we use tabs to provide some logical grouping and to reduce the page length. As already noted, using "gadgets" would prove unacceptable for performance reasons. The option of a one or two column layout would be a substantial improvement, especially if this can be chosen on a per-tab basis. That is, one tab could have a single column layout, while another might have two columns. The best of all would be to be able to group fields into collapsible sections, consistent with the proposed 4.2 UI. Each section could have a heading and a choice of one or two column layouts. This would allow considerable layout flexibility and control, while hopefully maintaining reasonable performance. This type of collapsible section grouping would be useful even without the two column option. Another thing we would like to see is some control over the placement of the Description field. Presently it always comes after custom fields and often requires scrolling to view. A simple option to chose a before or after placement would help. Better yet, let us choose its position amongst the collapsible sections suggested above. This would provide a consistent UI and very nice layout control.
          Hide
          Mark Liedtke added a comment -

          I know the cross posting is a bit of a no-no, but since it came up in this issue, issue JRA-19511 deals with the excessive dashboard load time.

          Show
          Mark Liedtke added a comment - I know the cross posting is a bit of a no-no, but since it came up in this issue, issue JRA-19511 deals with the excessive dashboard load time.
          Hide
          Edwin Wong [Atlassian] added a comment -

          Thank you for all your comments on layout customization. This is something we are looking at after the release of 4.2. We will certainly pay extra attention to testing performance on the page. We are not intending to use gadget technology for the configurable layout.

          When we are ready, we will post designs and screens for that work for review and will invite all users from this post to comment and provide us feedback on it.

          Show
          Edwin Wong [Atlassian] added a comment - Thank you for all your comments on layout customization. This is something we are looking at after the release of 4.2. We will certainly pay extra attention to testing performance on the page. We are not intending to use gadget technology for the configurable layout. When we are ready, we will post designs and screens for that work for review and will invite all users from this post to comment and provide us feedback on it.
          Hide
          Kevin S added a comment -

          1) It would be helpful to have to have a visualization of the workflow. current workflow step would be green (yellow if due date imminent, red late). all workflow steps visible with only valid options not grayed out. user simply clicks on valid option and can easily full context of status.
          2) You also need to allow standard web font sizing selection, similiar to dpi settings in ms windows. users have various vision capability, while I love 8-10pt type, most people will want another option, especially if using a projector.
          3) Use a template design system similar to the dashboard functionality for the issue view. Field layout should be customizable by user.
          4) In many ways you would be better off re-implmenting the old UI and improving it with the above features.
          5) (If you didn't in the first place) Get feedback from a larger % of your user base and share prototype views or contract to have a human factors expert review the design ideas.

          Show
          Kevin S added a comment - 1) It would be helpful to have to have a visualization of the workflow. current workflow step would be green (yellow if due date imminent, red late). all workflow steps visible with only valid options not grayed out. user simply clicks on valid option and can easily full context of status. 2) You also need to allow standard web font sizing selection, similiar to dpi settings in ms windows. users have various vision capability, while I love 8-10pt type, most people will want another option, especially if using a projector. 3) Use a template design system similar to the dashboard functionality for the issue view. Field layout should be customizable by user. 4) In many ways you would be better off re-implmenting the old UI and improving it with the above features. 5) (If you didn't in the first place) Get feedback from a larger % of your user base and share prototype views or contract to have a human factors expert review the design ideas.
          Hide
          John Price added a comment -

          Just to echo a few comments from above:

          • I've been using and administering JIRA for years at three different companies and I liked the new look right away, although it was a little odd to put it in a point release. Water under the bridge now though.
          • We are implementing more teams on JIRA at the moment and my anecdotal experience is that new users like the new interface and think the old one is horrible, cluttered, and ugly. Existing users (mostly developers and not business teams) liked the old one. Frankly as I work to customize a test 4.1 JIRA for rollout, when I go back to the live 4.0 version it's a bit of a jolt. The left side actions were very cluttered - users had about 20 things they could click on, and there wasn't any real grouping or prioritization. The new model of "here are the most common actions. Click here for other stuff" is nice.
          • I agree that there's a lot of white space on the right as you scroll, but I don't really know what to do about that. Images and/or links and/or attachments on the right might work. As far as the comment width though I disagree that the default should be to stretch the whole width of the screen. I have a 24" monitor and reading text that wide is too slow. I did a quick Google about column width and readability and there's a whole science devoted to it. The first couple of things I read suggested that optimal width for speed/comprehension is only about 12 words due to extra time spent finding the start of the next line on long lines.
          • I have mixed feelings about the missing link underlines. It's fairly consistent within JIRA (blue = clickable) but I'll have to train people a bit.
          • Collapsible sections help a lot.
          • Adding comments while being able to view the ticket into is a huge improvement over 4.0. Same for the always-visible header and buttons.
          • I'd make the issue key a bit more obvious.
          • Please fix the transparent avatar bug (JRA-21439) so I can easily provide another visual cue to users about which project they are in.

          Thanks.

          Show
          John Price added a comment - Just to echo a few comments from above: I've been using and administering JIRA for years at three different companies and I liked the new look right away, although it was a little odd to put it in a point release. Water under the bridge now though. We are implementing more teams on JIRA at the moment and my anecdotal experience is that new users like the new interface and think the old one is horrible, cluttered, and ugly. Existing users (mostly developers and not business teams) liked the old one. Frankly as I work to customize a test 4.1 JIRA for rollout, when I go back to the live 4.0 version it's a bit of a jolt. The left side actions were very cluttered - users had about 20 things they could click on, and there wasn't any real grouping or prioritization. The new model of "here are the most common actions. Click here for other stuff" is nice. I agree that there's a lot of white space on the right as you scroll, but I don't really know what to do about that. Images and/or links and/or attachments on the right might work. As far as the comment width though I disagree that the default should be to stretch the whole width of the screen. I have a 24" monitor and reading text that wide is too slow. I did a quick Google about column width and readability and there's a whole science devoted to it. The first couple of things I read suggested that optimal width for speed/comprehension is only about 12 words due to extra time spent finding the start of the next line on long lines. I have mixed feelings about the missing link underlines. It's fairly consistent within JIRA (blue = clickable) but I'll have to train people a bit. Collapsible sections help a lot. Adding comments while being able to view the ticket into is a huge improvement over 4.0. Same for the always-visible header and buttons. I'd make the issue key a bit more obvious. Please fix the transparent avatar bug ( JRA-21439 ) so I can easily provide another visual cue to users about which project they are in. Thanks.
          Hide
          Maurizio Mancini added a comment -

          Hello,

          I will add the comments I have been getting since we upgraded last week.

          In general people liked that the look was being modernized but when it came to the View issue screen the feelings were unanomous:

          • 1) too much white
            2) Can't see the headings
            3) should be some separator lines between the fields or a changing background shading from field to field (i.e. white background on field 1, grey background on field 2, etc...) *

          I have attached a screen shot of our screen and I think it highlights how the current layout gets even worse when you have a number of custom fields. Depending how much data is in the custom fields you don't even see the description of the issue (look way at the bottom in my MM Sample attachment).

          A few other suggestions i would make are:

          1) The Description and attachments should be near the top
          2) I would move the custom fields in an area by itself just below the People Box. This would now allow my suggestion number 1 to happen.
          3) With the custom fields on the right you would have to increase the current space alotted to these boxes. I wouldn't increase it by much, 25% more than this area has now.
          4) The Date fields at least for us are not as urgent. They could be moved lower on the right side or even if you leave them where they are they will move down with the move of the Custom fields section.

          These are our thoughts.

          Thank-You

          Show
          Maurizio Mancini added a comment - Hello, I will add the comments I have been getting since we upgraded last week. In general people liked that the look was being modernized but when it came to the View issue screen the feelings were unanomous: 1) too much white 2) Can't see the headings 3) should be some separator lines between the fields or a changing background shading from field to field (i.e. white background on field 1, grey background on field 2, etc...) * I have attached a screen shot of our screen and I think it highlights how the current layout gets even worse when you have a number of custom fields. Depending how much data is in the custom fields you don't even see the description of the issue (look way at the bottom in my MM Sample attachment). A few other suggestions i would make are: 1) The Description and attachments should be near the top 2) I would move the custom fields in an area by itself just below the People Box. This would now allow my suggestion number 1 to happen. 3) With the custom fields on the right you would have to increase the current space alotted to these boxes. I wouldn't increase it by much, 25% more than this area has now. 4) The Date fields at least for us are not as urgent. They could be moved lower on the right side or even if you leave them where they are they will move down with the move of the Custom fields section. These are our thoughts. Thank-You
          Hide
          Kavian Moradhassel added a comment -

          The example provided by the previous user does show the problem when adding a large amount of text into a custom field, and the impact of that on the overall layout.

          However, this is only a problem when a custom field supports a large amount of content (i.e. a Free Text Field, and possibly a Multi-User Picker). Rather than move all custom fields elsewhere, how about adding the option of having a tab displayed in the "Activity" section of the screen (i.e. with Comments, Work Log, History, etc.) rather than in the main section of the issue? If a tab could be in either of the two places, this would allow for better use of the space.

          Show
          Kavian Moradhassel added a comment - The example provided by the previous user does show the problem when adding a large amount of text into a custom field, and the impact of that on the overall layout. However, this is only a problem when a custom field supports a large amount of content (i.e. a Free Text Field, and possibly a Multi-User Picker). Rather than move all custom fields elsewhere, how about adding the option of having a tab displayed in the "Activity" section of the screen (i.e. with Comments, Work Log, History, etc.) rather than in the main section of the issue? If a tab could be in either of the two places, this would allow for better use of the space.
          Hide
          Roy Krishna [Atlassian] added a comment -

          Thanks for everyone's feedback on the view issue page.
          We are still listening to you all and lots of the feedback is making into the next release.

          Cheers,
          Roy

          Show
          Roy Krishna [Atlassian] added a comment - Thanks for everyone's feedback on the view issue page. We are still listening to you all and lots of the feedback is making into the next release. Cheers, Roy
          Hide
          Maurizio Mancini added a comment - - edited

          Kavian,

          Thanks for your suggestion. I don't think the suggestion of moving the customer fields to a tab will be enjoyed by everyone. you would have to take a poll to see what people say.

          You will note that with the old layout we never had a complaint where the custom fields were because the screen was more compressed and we actually got to see the description and the attachments even with a custom field with text.

          Here are a few more suggestions/comments:

          • Why not move the 3 fields (Status, Resolution and Fix Version) under the group to the left (under the component field) like it was in the old JIRA. This way you don't waste the middle of the screen on so little information.
          • Once you have moved these there then you could move the Description and Attachment fields to the middle which is the most important information that you want to see first when you come into an issue.
          • We also noticed that with an issue that has sub-tasks you are not showing the issue number on the parent issue. We used to have this in the prior version. You must add this back. It is very cumbersome when you are reviewing a parent issue with multiple sub-task and you have to click each issue just to see the number.
          • We also want to say that we agree that if you are using a 24 inch screen like everyone at our company has, the current layout looks like a vast wasteland in the middle.
          Show
          Maurizio Mancini added a comment - - edited Kavian, Thanks for your suggestion. I don't think the suggestion of moving the customer fields to a tab will be enjoyed by everyone. you would have to take a poll to see what people say. You will note that with the old layout we never had a complaint where the custom fields were because the screen was more compressed and we actually got to see the description and the attachments even with a custom field with text. Here are a few more suggestions/comments: Why not move the 3 fields (Status, Resolution and Fix Version) under the group to the left (under the component field) like it was in the old JIRA. This way you don't waste the middle of the screen on so little information. Once you have moved these there then you could move the Description and Attachment fields to the middle which is the most important information that you want to see first when you come into an issue. We also noticed that with an issue that has sub-tasks you are not showing the issue number on the parent issue. We used to have this in the prior version. You must add this back. It is very cumbersome when you are reviewing a parent issue with multiple sub-task and you have to click each issue just to see the number. We also want to say that we agree that if you are using a 24 inch screen like everyone at our company has, the current layout looks like a vast wasteland in the middle.
          Hide
          Kavian Moradhassel added a comment -

          Please note (very important!) that I was not suggesting moving all the custom fields to a tab. I only suggested that we be given the option to do so (probably as part of the screen definition), and this would be particularly useful for fields that are expected to contain a large amount of text.

          I definitely had complaints about the old layout, and I would absolutely not want to see us go back.

          In general, I think we need to a be a little careful here about assuming that every user is looking at the issue from the same perspective. Maurizio, you mention that the Description and Attachment fields are the most important information to see, and I disagree with that completely. They are probably the most important information for the person who is going to address a defect or a feature request, but not every issue being tracked in a JIRA instance is a defect or a feature request, and not every user of the system is the developer.

          As an example, we're in the midst of deploying JIRA for large-scale product development, where we will have thousands of issues raised during a release for multiple purposes (project tracking, feature requests, defects, enhancements, etc.), and a few people trying to manage that set, including routing the issues to the right development team. For these types of users, the most important fields to look at are Status, Resolution, Component, Fix Version, and a few custom fields we're adding.

          Another example is a product tester who has raised a defect and is getting a fix back to re-test. For this person, the Description and Attachments that they provided are completely useless to their job...they need to see how the problem was resolved in order to determine how to re-test it.

          I do agree that seeing issue numbers on the sub-task list would be handy...

          Show
          Kavian Moradhassel added a comment - Please note (very important!) that I was not suggesting moving all the custom fields to a tab. I only suggested that we be given the option to do so (probably as part of the screen definition), and this would be particularly useful for fields that are expected to contain a large amount of text. I definitely had complaints about the old layout, and I would absolutely not want to see us go back. In general, I think we need to a be a little careful here about assuming that every user is looking at the issue from the same perspective. Maurizio, you mention that the Description and Attachment fields are the most important information to see, and I disagree with that completely. They are probably the most important information for the person who is going to address a defect or a feature request, but not every issue being tracked in a JIRA instance is a defect or a feature request, and not every user of the system is the developer. As an example, we're in the midst of deploying JIRA for large-scale product development, where we will have thousands of issues raised during a release for multiple purposes (project tracking, feature requests, defects, enhancements, etc.), and a few people trying to manage that set, including routing the issues to the right development team. For these types of users, the most important fields to look at are Status, Resolution, Component, Fix Version, and a few custom fields we're adding. Another example is a product tester who has raised a defect and is getting a fix back to re-test. For this person, the Description and Attachments that they provided are completely useless to their job...they need to see how the problem was resolved in order to determine how to re-test it. I do agree that seeing issue numbers on the sub-task list would be handy...
          Hide
          Maurizio Mancini added a comment -

          I am also not assuming that the issue is being looked at by the same type of people. I have 200 users across various departments (QA, Dev, Support, Operations, etc...) all with very different views on the issue and the comments are coming from various types of users.

          I think my suggestion on moving the 3 middle fields to the left would actually bring all the key "status related" fields together and give people from any department the quick status they want.

          On the product tester, you are assuming that the same tester is always getting the same issue back to test which in our case only happens 50% of the time. The other 50% of the time the QA person is new to the issue and has to review it. You will also note that we have a custom "Dev release notes" field in which our Development team summarizes how it was resolved. So the tester sees how it was resolved right away at the top of the issue without having to scroll to the bottom to read the numerous comments.

          GUI layout is never easy. You can't make everyone happy so we are making our suggestions based on the feedback of our 200 users that I have received to date.

          I also agree that going back to the old layout is not something that we would want to do as well. Let's move forward.

          Show
          Maurizio Mancini added a comment - I am also not assuming that the issue is being looked at by the same type of people. I have 200 users across various departments (QA, Dev, Support, Operations, etc...) all with very different views on the issue and the comments are coming from various types of users. I think my suggestion on moving the 3 middle fields to the left would actually bring all the key "status related" fields together and give people from any department the quick status they want. On the product tester, you are assuming that the same tester is always getting the same issue back to test which in our case only happens 50% of the time. The other 50% of the time the QA person is new to the issue and has to review it. You will also note that we have a custom "Dev release notes" field in which our Development team summarizes how it was resolved. So the tester sees how it was resolved right away at the top of the issue without having to scroll to the bottom to read the numerous comments. GUI layout is never easy. You can't make everyone happy so we are making our suggestions based on the feedback of our 200 users that I have received to date. I also agree that going back to the old layout is not something that we would want to do as well. Let's move forward.
          Hide
          Brett Ryan added a comment -

          @Maurizio, our company only has 15" and 19" screens, we need to be sure the view issue screen works for all browser sizes, even at home on my 24" I only use a browser size of 900 wide, maximized browsers look ugly for most sites.

          Show
          Brett Ryan added a comment - @Maurizio, our company only has 15" and 19" screens, we need to be sure the view issue screen works for all browser sizes, even at home on my 24" I only use a browser size of 900 wide, maximized browsers look ugly for most sites.
          Hide
          Paul Ingemi added a comment -

          My company recently upgraded to JIRA v4.1.2. My immediate problem was I couldn't view much of the issue in my window. The reason is because the floating bar + non-floating JIRA bar combined takes up roughly half my window, and after scrolling, a third of my window. Combined with the increased line/font size and excess vertical whitespace, there's just not a whole lot visible.

          Edwin commented: "We typically design for optimal viewing at a minimum of 1024 * 768... our studies indicate to us that most users these days have screen resolutions of at least 1024 (mostly more) pixels, and our design team has worked to optimize based on that choice."

          The problem here is while my screen is a tad bit over the minimum, my browser window isn't. I, like many other people, don't browse with my window maximized. JIRA should ideally play nice with the other windows sharing my screen. A smaller minimum size also has the benefit of working on smaller devices.

          My other issue is the screen shots: the products I work on are text-heavy. When I click the screen shot in an issue, a javascript shows a scaled down version of it. This is nice, but the text I need to look at is unreadable which makes the feature useless to me. It be nice if I can right click the zoomed view to open the image in a new tab. Right now if I do that, it will disappear (ie, captures both mouse buttons instead of just left-clicks). Some other websites show a scaled view and a section of the full size view that is under the mouse.

          Thanks guys.

          Show
          Paul Ingemi added a comment - My company recently upgraded to JIRA v4.1.2. My immediate problem was I couldn't view much of the issue in my window. The reason is because the floating bar + non-floating JIRA bar combined takes up roughly half my window, and after scrolling, a third of my window. Combined with the increased line/font size and excess vertical whitespace, there's just not a whole lot visible. Edwin commented: "We typically design for optimal viewing at a minimum of 1024 * 768... our studies indicate to us that most users these days have screen resolutions of at least 1024 (mostly more) pixels, and our design team has worked to optimize based on that choice." The problem here is while my screen is a tad bit over the minimum, my browser window isn't. I, like many other people, don't browse with my window maximized. JIRA should ideally play nice with the other windows sharing my screen. A smaller minimum size also has the benefit of working on smaller devices. My other issue is the screen shots: the products I work on are text-heavy. When I click the screen shot in an issue, a javascript shows a scaled down version of it. This is nice, but the text I need to look at is unreadable which makes the feature useless to me. It be nice if I can right click the zoomed view to open the image in a new tab. Right now if I do that, it will disappear (ie, captures both mouse buttons instead of just left-clicks). Some other websites show a scaled view and a section of the full size view that is under the mouse. Thanks guys.
          Hide
          Penny Wyatt [Atlassian] added a comment -

          My other issue is the screen shots: the products I work on are text-heavy. When I click the screen shot in an issue, a javascript shows a scaled down version of it. This is nice, but the text I need to look at is unreadable which makes the feature useless to me. It be nice if I can right click the zoomed view to open the image in a new tab. Right now if I do that, it will disappear (ie, captures both mouse buttons instead of just left-clicks). Some other websites show a scaled view and a section of the full size view that is under the mouse.

          Paul, you can still middle/right click the image file name (underneath the thumbnail) to view it in a new tab.

          Show
          Penny Wyatt [Atlassian] added a comment - My other issue is the screen shots: the products I work on are text-heavy. When I click the screen shot in an issue, a javascript shows a scaled down version of it. This is nice, but the text I need to look at is unreadable which makes the feature useless to me. It be nice if I can right click the zoomed view to open the image in a new tab. Right now if I do that, it will disappear (ie, captures both mouse buttons instead of just left-clicks). Some other websites show a scaled view and a section of the full size view that is under the mouse. Paul, you can still middle/right click the image file name (underneath the thumbnail) to view it in a new tab.
          Hide
          G B added a comment -

          For me, left, middle, or right-clicking the title under the window all cause the image to close and no tab to be opened.

          Show
          G B added a comment - For me, left, middle, or right-clicking the title under the window all cause the image to close and no tab to be opened.
          Hide
          Penny Wyatt [Atlassian] added a comment -

          Gregory, sorry for being unclear. The link I'm referring to is the one below the thumbnail on the View Issue page, not the caption in the preview popup.

          Show
          Penny Wyatt [Atlassian] added a comment - Gregory, sorry for being unclear. The link I'm referring to is the one below the thumbnail on the View Issue page, not the caption in the preview popup.
          Hide
          G B added a comment -

          Ah, I see. That works.

          Show
          G B added a comment - Ah, I see. That works.
          Hide
          Paul Ingemi added a comment -

          @Penny: Yes, I found that out. I try to remind myself to right click the thumbnail, but I usually end up clicking it. Not capturing right click on the zoomed version would make that a bit more convenient.

          I mentioned the screenshot issue because the zoomed view seems fundamentally broken when screenshots are likely to be larger than the area available to view them and are likely to have text or other details that need to be visible. At least for my workflow it doesn't seem to make a whole lot of sense... I don't know about other JIRA users.

          Show
          Paul Ingemi added a comment - @Penny: Yes, I found that out. I try to remind myself to right click the thumbnail, but I usually end up clicking it. Not capturing right click on the zoomed version would make that a bit more convenient. I mentioned the screenshot issue because the zoomed view seems fundamentally broken when screenshots are likely to be larger than the area available to view them and are likely to have text or other details that need to be visible. At least for my workflow it doesn't seem to make a whole lot of sense... I don't know about other JIRA users.
          Hide
          Kay Abendroth added a comment -

          (...) the zoomed view seems fundamentally broken when screenshots are likely to be larger than the area available to view them and are likely to have text or other details that need to be visible. At least for my workflow it doesn't seem to make a whole lot of sense... I don't know about other JIRA users.

          Agreed. I would like to see this approach:

          1. Clicking on the thumbnail opens the picture in the same way it will be opened right now, but
          2. clicking on the picture itself sets the zoom-level to 100 per cent, if the original size is bigger than the view area.
          3. Clicking on the 100 per cent picture zooms back to view area fitting size and
          4. you can close the picture view by clicking on the upper-right corner, where you will have an "X" for this action.
          Show
          Kay Abendroth added a comment - (...) the zoomed view seems fundamentally broken when screenshots are likely to be larger than the area available to view them and are likely to have text or other details that need to be visible. At least for my workflow it doesn't seem to make a whole lot of sense... I don't know about other JIRA users. Agreed. I would like to see this approach: Clicking on the thumbnail opens the picture in the same way it will be opened right now, but clicking on the picture itself sets the zoom-level to 100 per cent, if the original size is bigger than the view area. Clicking on the 100 per cent picture zooms back to view area fitting size and you can close the picture view by clicking on the upper-right corner, where you will have an "X" for this action.
          Hide
          David Hergert [Windstream] added a comment -

          As said, if you click the image thumbnail it will open using "FancyBox" (scaled down). If you click the image filename, it will open the image straight in your browser.

          If you want the zoom ability, its been mentioned before so work on getting FancyBox to add that ability, or get Atlassian to switch to LightBox.

          Show
          David Hergert [Windstream] added a comment - As said, if you click the image thumbnail it will open using " FancyBox " (scaled down). If you click the image filename, it will open the image straight in your browser. If you want the zoom ability, its been mentioned before so work on getting FancyBox to add that ability, or get Atlassian to switch to LightBox .
          Hide
          G B added a comment -

          The view large issue problem exists in Confluence as well as JIRA, but in Confluence there is no "click the filename" workaround available. The proper solution to this problem would result in the ability to view large images at 100% in both JIRA and Confluence using the same UI actions.

          Show
          G B added a comment - The view large issue problem exists in Confluence as well as JIRA, but in Confluence there is no "click the filename" workaround available. The proper solution to this problem would result in the ability to view large images at 100% in both JIRA and Confluence using the same UI actions.
          Hide
          Paul Ingemi added a comment -

          Well folks, I've just discovered CSS3 media queries. Now I can disappear the stalker bar on my current monitor and yet have it when my company decides to give me a very large monitor. I wouldn't hold your breath waiting for the latter. So let's say the stalker bar is 150px and should use, at most, 10% of the screen height. We can add this to Firefox's usercontent.css file:

          @media screen and (max-height: 1500px) {
            /* Monitor does not meet minimum screen height reqs; Disable stalker bar. */
            #jira .stalker-placeholder {display:none;}
            #jira #stalker {position: relative !important; top: 0px !important; }
          }
          

          It would be nice to also eliminate everything but the command bar from the stalker bar so we can enable the stalker bar on shorter window heights, but I'm not sure how to do that in pure CSS.

          The remaining downside is there's still very little visible before scrolling down the page, but at least I can live with this. Here's to hoping Atlassian does something similar or better.

          Show
          Paul Ingemi added a comment - Well folks, I've just discovered CSS3 media queries. Now I can disappear the stalker bar on my current monitor and yet have it when my company decides to give me a very large monitor. I wouldn't hold your breath waiting for the latter. So let's say the stalker bar is 150px and should use, at most, 10% of the screen height. We can add this to Firefox's usercontent.css file: @media screen and (max-height: 1500px) { /* Monitor does not meet minimum screen height reqs; Disable stalker bar. */ #jira .stalker-placeholder {display:none;} #jira #stalker {position: relative !important; top: 0px !important; } } It would be nice to also eliminate everything but the command bar from the stalker bar so we can enable the stalker bar on shorter window heights, but I'm not sure how to do that in pure CSS. The remaining downside is there's still very little visible before scrolling down the page, but at least I can live with this. Here's to hoping Atlassian does something similar or better.
          Hide
          Jason C. Hammons [Atlassian] added a comment - - edited

          Greetings,

          These may be useful for others to use or extend:

          I think this is a worthwhile solution. Then again, I'm the type of person who wants to have custom CSS on every website I frequent anyway...

          Cheers,
          Jason Hammons

          Show
          Jason C. Hammons [Atlassian] added a comment - - edited Greetings, These may be useful for others to use or extend: http://userstyles.org/ http://userstyles.org/styles/36317 http://userstyles.org/styles/31878 http://userstyles.org/styles/36832 http://userstyles.org/styles/31511 http://userstyles.org/styles/18597 I think this is a worthwhile solution. Then again, I'm the type of person who wants to have custom CSS on every website I frequent anyway... Cheers, Jason Hammons
          Hide
          Björn Schormann added a comment -

          Luckily I did not upgrade and as long as the UI is not changeable I won't and never will. I realized by chance using the atlassian support JIRA that from a certain time on (the new UI) it was close to unusable. The screen only shows white space, no information. I have to scroll way way more than before.

          On the other hand, whilst the new UI is not changeable back to the old one I have an easy job as an administrator: because I know that all my users (10 persons) do not like the new look at well, they won't ask me for an update.
          My only fear is on how to migrate to a different platform than JIRA in the future sometime, in case that 4.0.x will not be supported some day. Hopefully 4.0.x will supported for a long long time .... and maybe (and preferable) with >4.2 we will have a structured layout back. But it sounds that atlassian does think that the new UI is an improvement and is not even willing to consider that other users do not like it.

          I personally do think that if something is proven good, why change it. I for example do not know a single person that did not change - from Windows XP on - the UI look back to classical, avoiding all the crap that are meant and "marketed" as improvements over the marvelous Windows 2000 theme. The new XP look was bad (growing in size, wasting screen space), Vista is not even noteworthy, and my first look at Windows 7 was "OMG, do I wear the wrong glasses today?" Everything is big, no information left.

          And then I see that atlassian also wants to be stylish .... Sorry guys, although I know that the common opinion is that constant change is necessary to a product to create the impression of being state of the art ... I beg to differ.

          All I would like to mention is that a bug tracker is not a social network. JIRA is not facebook!

          Cheers
          Björn

          Show
          Björn Schormann added a comment - Luckily I did not upgrade and as long as the UI is not changeable I won't and never will. I realized by chance using the atlassian support JIRA that from a certain time on (the new UI) it was close to unusable. The screen only shows white space, no information. I have to scroll way way more than before. On the other hand, whilst the new UI is not changeable back to the old one I have an easy job as an administrator: because I know that all my users (10 persons) do not like the new look at well, they won't ask me for an update. My only fear is on how to migrate to a different platform than JIRA in the future sometime, in case that 4.0.x will not be supported some day. Hopefully 4.0.x will supported for a long long time .... and maybe (and preferable) with >4.2 we will have a structured layout back. But it sounds that atlassian does think that the new UI is an improvement and is not even willing to consider that other users do not like it. I personally do think that if something is proven good, why change it. I for example do not know a single person that did not change - from Windows XP on - the UI look back to classical, avoiding all the crap that are meant and "marketed" as improvements over the marvelous Windows 2000 theme. The new XP look was bad (growing in size, wasting screen space), Vista is not even noteworthy, and my first look at Windows 7 was "OMG, do I wear the wrong glasses today?" Everything is big, no information left. And then I see that atlassian also wants to be stylish .... Sorry guys, although I know that the common opinion is that constant change is necessary to a product to create the impression of being state of the art ... I beg to differ. All I would like to mention is that a bug tracker is not a social network. JIRA is not facebook! Cheers Björn
          Hide
          Rolf Krüger added a comment -

          Björn, Fully ACK!!!!

          Cheers
          Rolf

          Show
          Rolf Krüger added a comment - Björn, Fully ACK!!!! Cheers Rolf
          Hide
          Scott Farquhar [Atlassian] added a comment -

          Björn,

          I'm sorry that you don't like the new UI. It took me a while to get used to it, and now I use it every day and couldn't go back.

          We are aware that some users don't like it, and we are making improvements release by release. In 4.2 we have tightened things up a little, made things easier to find & use, reduced whitespace and introduced keyboard shortcuts to make things much faster to use. My hope is that with these small improvements, people will like the new UI more than the old. Of course - for some people any change is too much, and for them we are happy that they remain JIRA 4.0 customers.

          In terms of your comment:

          constant change is necessary to a product to create the impression of being state of the art

          4.1 is the first UI change we have made to JIRA in the 7 years since we released JIRA. We've had the same 5 tabs, the same (crappy) fonts since day one - so I'm not sure that we've been making constant change? There have been (and will continue to be) changes in 4.1->4.2->4.3 as we tweak things - but without those I'm not sure we'd be able to satisfy many of the people who commented on this page.

          Björn - I would love to hear your thoughts about what we could change on this page that would make the new UI better than the old one? I'm certain that with your and your users help we can win you over to the new look.

          Once again - I really appreciate you taking the time to comment on this page, and giving us the opportunity to win you back.

          Cheers,
          Scott Farquhar
          CEO, Atlassian

          Show
          Scott Farquhar [Atlassian] added a comment - Björn, I'm sorry that you don't like the new UI. It took me a while to get used to it, and now I use it every day and couldn't go back. We are aware that some users don't like it, and we are making improvements release by release. In 4.2 we have tightened things up a little, made things easier to find & use, reduced whitespace and introduced keyboard shortcuts to make things much faster to use. My hope is that with these small improvements, people will like the new UI more than the old. Of course - for some people any change is too much, and for them we are happy that they remain JIRA 4.0 customers. In terms of your comment: constant change is necessary to a product to create the impression of being state of the art 4.1 is the first UI change we have made to JIRA in the 7 years since we released JIRA. We've had the same 5 tabs, the same (crappy) fonts since day one - so I'm not sure that we've been making constant change? There have been (and will continue to be) changes in 4.1->4.2->4.3 as we tweak things - but without those I'm not sure we'd be able to satisfy many of the people who commented on this page. Björn - I would love to hear your thoughts about what we could change on this page that would make the new UI better than the old one? I'm certain that with your and your users help we can win you over to the new look. Once again - I really appreciate you taking the time to comment on this page, and giving us the opportunity to win you back. Cheers, Scott Farquhar CEO, Atlassian
          Hide
          Peter Moline added a comment - - edited

          Please keep working on the UI for the issues screen. I'm slowly getting used to it, and I'm starting to appreciate some of the improvements - but it's still not quite right.

          There's not a lot that I can say that hasn't already been said in the comments above, but I strongly agree with those users who have asked for greater distinctions / delineation between the different sections. For example, I find that the visual difference between the field labels and the field values is insufficient. I'd like to see a mockup where the field labels have a darker background shading, or faint gridlines, or something to make them appear more different from the field values.

          Also, I dislike the fact that the operations & workflow buttons look like tabs. Have you thought about adding little icons to them (like the Edit button has a pencil) to indicate function? Or even adding an icon to the left of each group of buttons (as opposed to adding an icon to each individual button). For example, you could add a lightning bolt to the operations group, and a gearwheel to the workflow group, and enclose each group in a box to indicate grouped functionality.

          regards,
          Pete

          Show
          Peter Moline added a comment - - edited Please keep working on the UI for the issues screen. I'm slowly getting used to it, and I'm starting to appreciate some of the improvements - but it's still not quite right. There's not a lot that I can say that hasn't already been said in the comments above, but I strongly agree with those users who have asked for greater distinctions / delineation between the different sections. For example, I find that the visual difference between the field labels and the field values is insufficient. I'd like to see a mockup where the field labels have a darker background shading, or faint gridlines, or something to make them appear more different from the field values. Also, I dislike the fact that the operations & workflow buttons look like tabs. Have you thought about adding little icons to them (like the Edit button has a pencil) to indicate function? Or even adding an icon to the left of each group of buttons (as opposed to adding an icon to each individual button). For example, you could add a lightning bolt to the operations group, and a gearwheel to the workflow group, and enclose each group in a box to indicate grouped functionality. regards, Pete
          Hide
          Edwin Wong [Atlassian] added a comment -

          Peter,

          Thanks for the comments. Have you tried the latest JIRA 4.2? We have taken quite a number of the suggestions on board, especially with a better delineation between sections and custom fields. I would love to hear what your thoughts about the latest design.

          Regards,
          Edwin

          Show
          Edwin Wong [Atlassian] added a comment - Peter, Thanks for the comments. Have you tried the latest JIRA 4.2? We have taken quite a number of the suggestions on board, especially with a better delineation between sections and custom fields. I would love to hear what your thoughts about the latest design. Regards, Edwin
          Hide
          Markus Lepper added a comment -

          One (more) improvement idea:

          We have plenty of Custom fields (with often long names) being visible on the issue screen.
          The caption of the custom fields are broken into next line much too early and leaving a hige whitespace area right of this.
          (See attached screenshot)

          In case there is already configuration option available please guide me to the doc. TNX.

          Regards,
          Markus

          Show
          Markus Lepper added a comment - One (more) improvement idea: We have plenty of Custom fields (with often long names) being visible on the issue screen. The caption of the custom fields are broken into next line much too early and leaving a hige whitespace area right of this. (See attached screenshot) In case there is already configuration option available please guide me to the doc. TNX. Regards, Markus
          Hide
          Markus Lepper added a comment -

          We use these two fields Message Custom Field (for edit) and Message Custom Field (for view) provided by your Jira Toolkit Plugin.

          In 4.0.1 the name of the fields was not shown (=good) whereas in 4.2 it's visible (=ugly). (Compare both attachments)

          Any change for changing this?

          Thanks & BR,
          Markus

          Show
          Markus Lepper added a comment - We use these two fields Message Custom Field (for edit) and Message Custom Field (for view) provided by your Jira Toolkit Plugin . In 4.0.1 the name of the fields was not shown (=good) whereas in 4.2 it's visible (=ugly). (Compare both attachments) Any change for changing this? Thanks & BR, Markus
          Hide
          Roy Krishna [Atlassian] added a comment - - edited
          Update: The survey has closed

          UPDATE: Thank you for participating in our survey. We've assessed the results and with the current scope will not be adding this feature into JIRA 4.3. We will reassess the feature in a future release.


          Hi Guys,

          I hope you are all enjoying the new features in JIRA 4.2!

          As you all know in JIRA 4.1 we made some changes to the View Issue screen to provide a more streamlined and faster user experience when browsing issues. Continuing this theme in JIRA 4.2 we brought you dialogs and thanks to your suggestions some more tweaks to make important information stand out. Now in JIRA 4.3 we would like to continue this theme and again give you the chance to contribute where we should take the View Issue screen next. As you use JIRA everyday your feedback is valuable to us and we would love to hear from you.

          What we plan to do is allow customers to arrange the column widths and also move around each individual block on the View Issue screen. As many of you have given us great comments and suggestions we would like to invite you help us determine what is important to our customers on this topic. The following is a link to the prototype for JIRA 4.3 and also explains how you can help us:

          http://atlss.in/issueBlocks20669

          We really hope that you could take about 10mins of your time to help us determine what JIRA customers want and need from the View Issue screen.

          Many thanks and I hope you playing with the new JIRA View Issue prototype!

          Cheers,

          Roy Krishna
          JIRA Product Management
          roy at atlassian dot com

          Show
          Roy Krishna [Atlassian] added a comment - - edited Update: The survey has closed UPDATE: Thank you for participating in our survey. We've assessed the results and with the current scope will not be adding this feature into JIRA 4.3. We will reassess the feature in a future release. Hi Guys, I hope you are all enjoying the new features in JIRA 4.2! As you all know in JIRA 4.1 we made some changes to the View Issue screen to provide a more streamlined and faster user experience when browsing issues. Continuing this theme in JIRA 4.2 we brought you dialogs and thanks to your suggestions some more tweaks to make important information stand out. Now in JIRA 4.3 we would like to continue this theme and again give you the chance to contribute where we should take the View Issue screen next. As you use JIRA everyday your feedback is valuable to us and we would love to hear from you. What we plan to do is allow customers to arrange the column widths and also move around each individual block on the View Issue screen. As many of you have given us great comments and suggestions we would like to invite you help us determine what is important to our customers on this topic. The following is a link to the prototype for JIRA 4.3 and also explains how you can help us: http://atlss.in/issueBlocks20669 We really hope that you could take about 10mins of your time to help us determine what JIRA customers want and need from the View Issue screen. Many thanks and I hope you playing with the new JIRA View Issue prototype! Cheers, Roy Krishna JIRA Product Management roy at atlassian dot com
          Hide
          Jonathan L. Walters added a comment -

          Just upgraded from 4.0.1 to 4.2 is there anyway to change the view to look like 4.0.1 again? I use this with personal consulting and at work we have an enterprise License at work and I always upgrade my personal jira first....I have to tell you if it cannot be changed back I am highly debating moving to another ticketing system.

          Show
          Jonathan L. Walters added a comment - Just upgraded from 4.0.1 to 4.2 is there anyway to change the view to look like 4.0.1 again? I use this with personal consulting and at work we have an enterprise License at work and I always upgrade my personal jira first....I have to tell you if it cannot be changed back I am highly debating moving to another ticketing system.
          Hide
          Mark Moskovitz added a comment -

          @Jonathan L. Walters – Please read through the comment thread regarding changing the view screen back. Generally, Atlassian has decided to go with this new style, and is pushing it out to the rest of the system. One of things potentially coming is the ability to change the layout of the screen (See Roy's comment just above yours).

          In generally, I (and my users) like the new screen much better, and can't even remember what it used to look like.

          IMHO,

          #Mark

          Show
          Mark Moskovitz added a comment - @Jonathan L. Walters – Please read through the comment thread regarding changing the view screen back. Generally, Atlassian has decided to go with this new style, and is pushing it out to the rest of the system. One of things potentially coming is the ability to change the layout of the screen (See Roy's comment just above yours). In generally, I (and my users) like the new screen much better, and can't even remember what it used to look like. IMHO, #Mark
          Hide
          Paul Ngu added a comment -

          Here is one feedback from one of our users on the new view page UI

          "I don't like the button layout or the visual presentation of choices. It's difficult and confusing for a process that it already difficult and confusing. The visual separation is lousy - I spend a lot of time just trying to visually parse what's being presented. And the arbitrary movement of some fields is just confusing - why is "last mod" time off to the side now?

          Also, the new UI is perhaps clever, but the fact that it's neither obvious nor discoverable makes it problematic. One example is using the top comment box. I didn't realize that the comment box stays visible while you scroll."

          Show
          Paul Ngu added a comment - Here is one feedback from one of our users on the new view page UI "I don't like the button layout or the visual presentation of choices. It's difficult and confusing for a process that it already difficult and confusing. The visual separation is lousy - I spend a lot of time just trying to visually parse what's being presented. And the arbitrary movement of some fields is just confusing - why is "last mod" time off to the side now? Also, the new UI is perhaps clever, but the fact that it's neither obvious nor discoverable makes it problematic. One example is using the top comment box. I didn't realize that the comment box stays visible while you scroll."
          Hide
          Holger Schimanski added a comment - - edited

          I like the new UI and see good improvements from 4.1 to 4.2. We are currently migrating from JIRA 3.13 to 4.2.

          I would love to see a flexible row height for the attachments section. Please compare the two attached screenshots.

          vs.

          Show
          Holger Schimanski added a comment - - edited I like the new UI and see good improvements from 4.1 to 4.2. We are currently migrating from JIRA 3.13 to 4.2. I would love to see a flexible row height for the attachments section. Please compare the two attached screenshots. vs.
          Hide
          G B added a comment -

          Can anyone from Atlassian outline any currently anticipated changes to the Issue View that will be coming in JIRA 4.3?

          Show
          G B added a comment - Can anyone from Atlassian outline any currently anticipated changes to the Issue View that will be coming in JIRA 4.3?
          Hide
          Roy Krishna [Atlassian] added a comment -

          @Gregory

          At this stage we do not plan to make any huge UI changes in 4.3. One item we may re-style is the Issue Links section to reduce the large amount of white space there.
          This work has not started yet and if you are interested you can keep track of the latest 4.3 changes via the EAP releases.

          Show
          Roy Krishna [Atlassian] added a comment - @Gregory At this stage we do not plan to make any huge UI changes in 4.3. One item we may re-style is the Issue Links section to reduce the large amount of white space there. This work has not started yet and if you are interested you can keep track of the latest 4.3 changes via the EAP releases .
          Hide
          G B added a comment -

          The Issue Links section is the one remaining area of the Issue View redesign that we are dissatisfied with. It would be great to see this get some attention in JIRA 4.3. Thanks for the update.

          Show
          G B added a comment - The Issue Links section is the one remaining area of the Issue View redesign that we are dissatisfied with. It would be great to see this get some attention in JIRA 4.3. Thanks for the update.
          Hide
          Tom Moore added a comment -

          FYI.. English speakers using read left to right.. so having the important things like assignee/status on the right is confusing.

          Show
          Tom Moore added a comment - FYI.. English speakers using read left to right.. so having the important things like assignee/status on the right is confusing.
          Hide
          Michael added a comment -

          @Tom However, not everyone would agree what are the most important pieces of data. I find the Details and Description to be the most important and those are now on the left.

          Show
          Michael added a comment - @Tom However, not everyone would agree what are the most important pieces of data. I find the Details and Description to be the most important and those are now on the left.
          Hide
          Brett Ryan added a comment -

          I have to agree with Michael P, dates and property based data fields to me are like metadata, where summery and description are the two important fields which I will read first. I could never say I opened a job started reading the summary and thought to myself "I wish I read who reported this first", personally I think more should go to the right.

          Show
          Brett Ryan added a comment - I have to agree with Michael P, dates and property based data fields to me are like metadata, where summery and description are the two important fields which I will read first. I could never say I opened a job started reading the summary and thought to myself "I wish I read who reported this first", personally I think more should go to the right.
          Hide
          Mike Miller added a comment -

          I wont mind having the status bar stuff on the right, if we would stop wasting so much whitespace with all the rows beneath the bar. Some creative css could fix this situation. However this is an improvement on the 4.0-, as the wasted whitespace is on the right instead of the left.

          However now that code tags will put in scroll bars correctly (see BOX-10) I dont see this as being a huge problem.

          Show
          Mike Miller added a comment - I wont mind having the status bar stuff on the right, if we would stop wasting so much whitespace with all the rows beneath the bar. Some creative css could fix this situation. However this is an improvement on the 4.0-, as the wasted whitespace is on the right instead of the left. However now that code tags will put in scroll bars correctly (see BOX-10 ) I dont see this as being a huge problem.
          Hide
          Roy Krishna [Atlassian] added a comment -

          @Gregory

          The recent 4.3 beta1 release includes the updated Issue Links section.

          Show
          Roy Krishna [Atlassian] added a comment - @Gregory The recent 4.3 beta1 release includes the updated Issue Links section .
          Hide
          G B added a comment - - edited

          I rescind this comment and have learned how to use Firefox now. Talk about embarrassing...

          Show
          G B added a comment - - edited I rescind this comment and have learned how to use Firefox now. Talk about embarrassing...
          Hide
          Dean Harvey added a comment -

          I've been in econversation with Atlassian's Sales about this subject - they suggested that I record comments from my company on this issue, so....

          Pre-Upgrade Testing
          ===================
          Hi - We are an existing user of Jira - currently on 3.13 with approximately 230 users in 4 continents. We've been using Jira for approaching 5 years and with our customisation, Jira has become an integral part of our infrastructure.

          We've had approximately 30 key users from different departments evaluating 4.2 for a few weeks and I thought it would be worth sharing with you some of their feedback. Hopefully you'll appreciate that any negative points below are intended to be constructive and hopefully you'll take these on board to improve the product further. Up until now, our Users have had nothing but praise for Jira which is why I thought it would be worth flagging up these points for you as it's the first time I've heard of negative vibes. Also, most of our users are software developers (including web applications) or testers themselves so they appreciate the many difficulties with trying to please everyone. Testing has been undertaken using IE8, Firefox and Chrome.

          Most of the comments have been about the new look and feel - especially with the main Issue screen.

          With 3.13, there was clear definition between the various areas (Main Issue details, Available Workflow Actions, Operations, Changes Audit trail, etc.) using a subtle combination of shading, boxes and lines. However, with 4.2, many of our users have expressed a dislike for the new look - the common theme being that it is much more difficult to find what your looking for because the definition of areas isn't so clear.

          As a consequence of the above, the main issue screen appears to be very 'busy' - especially with our customisation which has approaching 100 custom fields set across 5 tabs. This wasn't a problem with 3.13.

          Few Users liked the new way that some of the drop down lists were presented - especially Operations and Workflow Actions. For example, Users preferred to see all available Operations and Workflow actions without having to click on another drop-down list of 'More Actions' or 'Workflow'. The way that these were presented before, they could see all options before deciding on the most appropriate one.

          Another frequent comment is that in IE7/IE8, some of the fonts appear to be too big or an inconsistent size on a screen and there doesn't appear to be a way for the end-user to adjust them (i.e. using 'View', Text Size', 'Smaller'). I'm told that this may be because Jira uses Cascading Style Sheets to control the display effect? We did however find a way of shrinking 'text only' on Firefox, but this was only temporary for the browser session.

          You'll hopefully be pleased to hear that there was also some positive feedback. Most users love JQL and the ease of adding/configuring gadgets. The look of the new dashboard(s) and filter results screen was fine.

          Post Upgrade Feedback
          =====================
          Hi - we've been live on Jira 4.2.4 for just over 3 weeks now (upgrading from 3.13) and I thought it would be worth following up the email with some more feedback.

          I must admit that I've been surprised by the proportion of negative feedback from our user community, much of along the same lines as the previous and primarily on the look and feel of the main issue form. To reiterate, users don't like:

          the large, seemingly non-adjustable font (I have found that changing the zoom level to about 93 - 94% in IE8 helps a bit, but this is only good for that browser session).

          the loss of definition between the labels and associated data (subtle shading has disappeared)

          the loss of definition between the various sections (again, subtle shading has disappeared)

          the loss of visibility for all available actions and workflow actions (users could previously see all available workflow/actions down the left hand side without having to click on 'workflow/more')

          in addition, we have found

          workflow actions longer than 25 characters are unreadable due to the fixed width of the drop down control. We have had to change ours with some horrible abbreviations in order to fit them in. In 3.13, long workflow action names wrapped around making them readable.

          similarly, the length of the tab names is fixed meaning that we have had to abbreviate our existing ones.

          In summary, users are finding that it is difficult to read/find what they want on the main issue screen and there appears to be little that system administrators can do to change the look & feel in response. All of the information is there, along with some nice shortcuts, but users just haven't taken to the change in layout look and feel I'm afraid.

          I would appreciate any comments you have on our feedback and hopefully plans to make changes so that I can feed this back to our users.

          n.b. I am the chief administrator for our implementation of Jira.
          Many thanks

          Show
          Dean Harvey added a comment - I've been in econversation with Atlassian's Sales about this subject - they suggested that I record comments from my company on this issue, so.... Pre-Upgrade Testing =================== Hi - We are an existing user of Jira - currently on 3.13 with approximately 230 users in 4 continents. We've been using Jira for approaching 5 years and with our customisation, Jira has become an integral part of our infrastructure. We've had approximately 30 key users from different departments evaluating 4.2 for a few weeks and I thought it would be worth sharing with you some of their feedback. Hopefully you'll appreciate that any negative points below are intended to be constructive and hopefully you'll take these on board to improve the product further. Up until now, our Users have had nothing but praise for Jira which is why I thought it would be worth flagging up these points for you as it's the first time I've heard of negative vibes. Also, most of our users are software developers (including web applications) or testers themselves so they appreciate the many difficulties with trying to please everyone. Testing has been undertaken using IE8, Firefox and Chrome. Most of the comments have been about the new look and feel - especially with the main Issue screen. With 3.13, there was clear definition between the various areas (Main Issue details, Available Workflow Actions, Operations, Changes Audit trail, etc.) using a subtle combination of shading, boxes and lines. However, with 4.2, many of our users have expressed a dislike for the new look - the common theme being that it is much more difficult to find what your looking for because the definition of areas isn't so clear. As a consequence of the above, the main issue screen appears to be very 'busy' - especially with our customisation which has approaching 100 custom fields set across 5 tabs. This wasn't a problem with 3.13. Few Users liked the new way that some of the drop down lists were presented - especially Operations and Workflow Actions. For example, Users preferred to see all available Operations and Workflow actions without having to click on another drop-down list of 'More Actions' or 'Workflow'. The way that these were presented before, they could see all options before deciding on the most appropriate one. Another frequent comment is that in IE7/IE8, some of the fonts appear to be too big or an inconsistent size on a screen and there doesn't appear to be a way for the end-user to adjust them (i.e. using 'View', Text Size', 'Smaller'). I'm told that this may be because Jira uses Cascading Style Sheets to control the display effect? We did however find a way of shrinking 'text only' on Firefox, but this was only temporary for the browser session. You'll hopefully be pleased to hear that there was also some positive feedback. Most users love JQL and the ease of adding/configuring gadgets. The look of the new dashboard(s) and filter results screen was fine. Post Upgrade Feedback ===================== Hi - we've been live on Jira 4.2.4 for just over 3 weeks now (upgrading from 3.13) and I thought it would be worth following up the email with some more feedback. I must admit that I've been surprised by the proportion of negative feedback from our user community, much of along the same lines as the previous and primarily on the look and feel of the main issue form. To reiterate, users don't like: the large, seemingly non-adjustable font (I have found that changing the zoom level to about 93 - 94% in IE8 helps a bit, but this is only good for that browser session). the loss of definition between the labels and associated data (subtle shading has disappeared) the loss of definition between the various sections (again, subtle shading has disappeared) the loss of visibility for all available actions and workflow actions (users could previously see all available workflow/actions down the left hand side without having to click on 'workflow/more') in addition, we have found workflow actions longer than 25 characters are unreadable due to the fixed width of the drop down control. We have had to change ours with some horrible abbreviations in order to fit them in. In 3.13, long workflow action names wrapped around making them readable. similarly, the length of the tab names is fixed meaning that we have had to abbreviate our existing ones. In summary, users are finding that it is difficult to read/find what they want on the main issue screen and there appears to be little that system administrators can do to change the look & feel in response. All of the information is there, along with some nice shortcuts, but users just haven't taken to the change in layout look and feel I'm afraid. I would appreciate any comments you have on our feedback and hopefully plans to make changes so that I can feed this back to our users. n.b. I am the chief administrator for our implementation of Jira. Many thanks
          Hide
          Tom Moore added a comment - - edited

          Thanks for the writeup Dean! I am in the exact same situation as you and was concerned about the exact same backlash. I think we'll just hold out in hopes that Atlassian comes up with some sort of "classic" look choice. Otherwise we may have to move to a new ticketing system, as they aren't even releasing security patches for 3.13 anymore (the last security bulletin said the only upgrade/patch path was to upgrade to the latest Jira 4.x, which means 3.13 is already EOL without any announcement)

          Show
          Tom Moore added a comment - - edited Thanks for the writeup Dean! I am in the exact same situation as you and was concerned about the exact same backlash. I think we'll just hold out in hopes that Atlassian comes up with some sort of "classic" look choice. Otherwise we may have to move to a new ticketing system, as they aren't even releasing security patches for 3.13 anymore (the last security bulletin said the only upgrade/patch path was to upgrade to the latest Jira 4.x, which means 3.13 is already EOL without any announcement)
          Hide
          Dieter Greiner added a comment -

          Hi all,

          I still think the right column (People, Dates) is still a huge waste of space.
          Try it yourself, this issue really looks bad on an iPad.

          Just my 2 € cents
          Dieter

          Show
          Dieter Greiner added a comment - Hi all, I still think the right column (People, Dates) is still a huge waste of space. Try it yourself, this issue really looks bad on an iPad. Just my 2 € cents Dieter
          Hide
          Markus Lepper added a comment -

          Hello Tom,

          Support End for 3.13 will be soon: July, 21th 2011 according to this Jira Support EOL policy.

          Regards,
          Markus

          Show
          Markus Lepper added a comment - Hello Tom, Support End for 3.13 will be soon: July, 21th 2011 according to this Jira Support EOL policy . Regards, Markus
          Hide
          G B added a comment -

          Yes, but what is Atlassian's policy with respect to which versions of JIRA get security patch releases? If Tom Moore's assertion is correct then it would appear that even "supported" versions of JIRA are not supported from a security perspective.

          Show
          G B added a comment - Yes, but what is Atlassian's policy with respect to which versions of JIRA get security patch releases? If Tom Moore's assertion is correct then it would appear that even "supported" versions of JIRA are not supported from a security perspective.
          Hide
          Michael Wagner added a comment -

          Have you considered to move from 3.13 to 4.0? The new "View Issue Page" has first been introduced in 4.1 (http://confluence.atlassian.com/display/JIRA/JIRA+4.1+Release+Notes). So this might be a solution after 3.13 is EOL.

          Show
          Michael Wagner added a comment - Have you considered to move from 3.13 to 4.0? The new "View Issue Page" has first been introduced in 4.1 ( http://confluence.atlassian.com/display/JIRA/JIRA+4.1+Release+Notes ). So this might be a solution after 3.13 is EOL.
          Hide
          Edwin Wong [Atlassian] added a comment -

          Greg, Markus, Tom, and Michael,

          Just clarifying on our support policy, general patches policy, and security patches policy, as they are slightly different.

          Our support policy outlines which product versions we support, which includes: identifying and troubleshooting issues, providng workarounds and solutions, etc. For more details of what our support includes, please refer to this page.

          Our general patches policy outlines exactly how, and when we produce ad-hoc patches for which versions of our product. Please note that patches are only considered intermediate, stop-gap, measures that we provide under unusual circumstances, for example, major ongoing loss of functionality or extensive downtime. They are not full fixes to bugs found in our software and are often customer-specific. Our patches policy can be found on this page.

          Our security patches policy is different from the general patch policy. On the one hand, there is no actual functionality loss or downtime involved, but on the other hand, we want to ensure patches can be used by many customers. Please see this page for details. The tradeoff results in having to limit the number of security patches provided for non-critical security vulnerabilities. Our recommendation is always to upgrade the vulnerable product instead of continuously patching it. In the case of the last security bulletin, we made the decision to not provide a patch for JIRA 3.13.

          Regards,
          Edwin Wong
          JIRA Product Management

          Show
          Edwin Wong [Atlassian] added a comment - Greg, Markus, Tom, and Michael, Just clarifying on our support policy, general patches policy, and security patches policy, as they are slightly different. Our support policy outlines which product versions we support, which includes: identifying and troubleshooting issues, providng workarounds and solutions, etc. For more details of what our support includes, please refer to this page . Our general patches policy outlines exactly how, and when we produce ad-hoc patches for which versions of our product. Please note that patches are only considered intermediate, stop-gap, measures that we provide under unusual circumstances, for example, major ongoing loss of functionality or extensive downtime. They are not full fixes to bugs found in our software and are often customer-specific. Our patches policy can be found on this page . Our security patches policy is different from the general patch policy. On the one hand, there is no actual functionality loss or downtime involved, but on the other hand, we want to ensure patches can be used by many customers. Please see this page for details. The tradeoff results in having to limit the number of security patches provided for non-critical security vulnerabilities. Our recommendation is always to upgrade the vulnerable product instead of continuously patching it. In the case of the last security bulletin, we made the decision to not provide a patch for JIRA 3.13. Regards, Edwin Wong JIRA Product Management
          Hide
          Edwin Wong [Atlassian] added a comment -

          Dean,
          Firstly, thanks for taking the time to write up all these feedback from your users. It certainly helps guide us on where we can continue to improve our UI.

          I'm sorry to hear that the new user interface didn't work out for some of your users, and very much appreciate that you and your users for understanding that it has been difficult for us to develop an interface that satisfies all our customers.

          To answer some of your feedback:

          the loss of definition between the labels and associated data

          the loss of definition between the various sections

          the large, seemingly non-adjustable font

          I know that this isn't an optimal solution, but one immediate option that you may wish to consider is customization of CSS as Jason has outlined above. Since the arrival of the new UI in JIRA 4.1, we have been incrementally taking in these feedback to improve our UI. Unforunately, at this stage though, I cannot make any strong commitments on when we may update our user interface in response to these items, apart from acknowledging that it is "on our radar".

          the loss of visibility for all available actions and workflow actions

          Has the keyboard shortcuts capability (for example, typing ".") introduced in 4.2 helped at all? Using this new feature, you can quickly and easily type in the transition, or action name you are looking for without having to click on the drop down altogether. Additionally, you do have some ability to control which workflow transitions are most important, and also in which order they appear. Hopefully this can address some of the challenges you are facing.

          Another frequent comment is that in IE7/IE8, some of the fonts appear to be too big or an inconsistent size on a screen and there doesn't appear to be a way for the end-user to adjust them (i.e. using 'View', Text Size', 'Smaller').

          I do not believe this should be the case, would you be able to provide more details about this in a separate bug report for this?

          Thanks and Regards,
          Edwin Wong
          JIRA Product Management

          Show
          Edwin Wong [Atlassian] added a comment - Dean, Firstly, thanks for taking the time to write up all these feedback from your users. It certainly helps guide us on where we can continue to improve our UI. I'm sorry to hear that the new user interface didn't work out for some of your users, and very much appreciate that you and your users for understanding that it has been difficult for us to develop an interface that satisfies all our customers. To answer some of your feedback: the loss of definition between the labels and associated data the loss of definition between the various sections the large, seemingly non-adjustable font I know that this isn't an optimal solution, but one immediate option that you may wish to consider is customization of CSS as Jason has outlined above . Since the arrival of the new UI in JIRA 4.1, we have been incrementally taking in these feedback to improve our UI. Unforunately, at this stage though, I cannot make any strong commitments on when we may update our user interface in response to these items, apart from acknowledging that it is "on our radar". the loss of visibility for all available actions and workflow actions Has the keyboard shortcuts capability (for example, typing ".") introduced in 4.2 helped at all? Using this new feature, you can quickly and easily type in the transition, or action name you are looking for without having to click on the drop down altogether. Additionally, you do have some ability to control which workflow transitions are most important, and also in which order they appear. Hopefully this can address some of the challenges you are facing. Another frequent comment is that in IE7/IE8, some of the fonts appear to be too big or an inconsistent size on a screen and there doesn't appear to be a way for the end-user to adjust them (i.e. using 'View', Text Size', 'Smaller'). I do not believe this should be the case, would you be able to provide more details about this in a separate bug report for this? Thanks and Regards, Edwin Wong JIRA Product Management
          Hide
          Theresa Jones added a comment -

          I agree that the view issue screen is currently not optimally laid out. What is the status of the prototype that was listed here? http://confluence.atlassian.com/display/DEV/Configurable+Issue+Sections+-+Prototype

          We are using Jira v4.3.1. We have a large organization. I believe that having good UI ultimately makes or breaks whether people use and like the product. Having customizable UI is by far the best option so that various organizations can manage it themselves. We have highly customizable dashboards and are able to make it user friendly for our end users, but then we get to the view screen and we lose them to a sea of information.

          As I look at the current view issue screen, here is what I see as problematic:

          1. The action buttons at the top of the screen look similar to tabs. Having them as left-hand navigation would be more straight forward. Or, you could people us choose which action buttons we have on the top, and which ones we stick on the side.
          2. The workflow action buttons are all the way to the right. These are the main buttons users need to click and they need to read left to right across various buttons to find them.
          3. The vote and watch icons are placed underneath the people section. It makes it seem as if you are voting on the people. Why not have a "more actions" button live right next to the "views" button and let "vote" and "watch" live on that list.
          4. The plus signs on the time tracking and attachments sections look like they should expand or minimize the selection. They do not look like something you would click to take action on that item.
          5. The user should be able to pull key fields that "they" deem important and put them in a bucket together at the top. For example for us it would be Title, Priority, Status, Fix Version, and Time Tracking. Everything else could live to the right in an area where users could choose to look at it or ignore it.

          Thanks for listening!

          Show
          Theresa Jones added a comment - I agree that the view issue screen is currently not optimally laid out. What is the status of the prototype that was listed here? http://confluence.atlassian.com/display/DEV/Configurable+Issue+Sections+-+Prototype We are using Jira v4.3.1. We have a large organization. I believe that having good UI ultimately makes or breaks whether people use and like the product. Having customizable UI is by far the best option so that various organizations can manage it themselves. We have highly customizable dashboards and are able to make it user friendly for our end users, but then we get to the view screen and we lose them to a sea of information. As I look at the current view issue screen, here is what I see as problematic: 1. The action buttons at the top of the screen look similar to tabs. Having them as left-hand navigation would be more straight forward. Or, you could people us choose which action buttons we have on the top, and which ones we stick on the side. 2. The workflow action buttons are all the way to the right. These are the main buttons users need to click and they need to read left to right across various buttons to find them. 3. The vote and watch icons are placed underneath the people section. It makes it seem as if you are voting on the people. Why not have a "more actions" button live right next to the "views" button and let "vote" and "watch" live on that list. 4. The plus signs on the time tracking and attachments sections look like they should expand or minimize the selection. They do not look like something you would click to take action on that item. 5. The user should be able to pull key fields that "they" deem important and put them in a bucket together at the top. For example for us it would be Title, Priority, Status, Fix Version, and Time Tracking. Everything else could live to the right in an area where users could choose to look at it or ignore it. Thanks for listening!
          Hide
          Mike Miller added a comment -

          Theresa, I agree with all of your points but #5 is simply brilliant. I cant believe nobody though of that before. My biggest project has a huge number of fields sorted into 5 or 6 tabs. Most of the fields were added to make one specific group or user happy, and most of the other groups do not care about them. Making the field order and rollup customizable would should make a variety of users happy in large installations!

          I would love to see this specific item broken out into a new JRA ticket so it can be requested and tracked separately. It shouldn't be difficult to implement, and it certainly would get my vote.

          Show
          Mike Miller added a comment - Theresa, I agree with all of your points but #5 is simply brilliant. I cant believe nobody though of that before. My biggest project has a huge number of fields sorted into 5 or 6 tabs. Most of the fields were added to make one specific group or user happy, and most of the other groups do not care about them. Making the field order and rollup customizable would should make a variety of users happy in large installations! I would love to see this specific item broken out into a new JRA ticket so it can be requested and tracked separately. It shouldn't be difficult to implement, and it certainly would get my vote.
          Hide
          Roy Krishna [Atlassian] added a comment -

          Theresa,

          Many thanks for taking the time to write up your feedback.

          There was no overwhelming response to the prototype we outlined, so at this time we've put that idea on hold.

          Thanks again,
          Roy Krishna
          JIRA Product Management

          Show
          Roy Krishna [Atlassian] added a comment - Theresa, Many thanks for taking the time to write up your feedback. There was no overwhelming response to the prototype we outlined, so at this time we've put that idea on hold. Thanks again, Roy Krishna JIRA Product Management
          Hide
          Maik Scheibler added a comment -

          I agree to most of the points made in http://jira.atlassian.com/browse/JRA-20669?focusedCommentId=233077&page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel#comment-233077
          But in addition to this i would like to let you know our most pressing points in the new UI:

          1. Link Style: Almost all of our 800 users are mad about the fact that the links are not recogizable as such. There is no difference in color or an underline to mark a link. You have always to hover the mouse over it to see the link/funktion. I had to answer countless phone calls to explain where to find some functions.
          2. Pull Down Menus: Prior to JIRA 4.1 all possible functions has been displayed in one column on the left. Now you have a few actions in the "action bar" and others in the pull down menu. This is a serious drawback for many of our users, because they don't see the actions at once and have to search for them.

          I know that there are keyboard shortcuts for many of the actions, but our userbase is "mouse driven". They want to see (the link), not to remember (the shortcut).

          Show
          Maik Scheibler added a comment - I agree to most of the points made in http://jira.atlassian.com/browse/JRA-20669?focusedCommentId=233077&page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel#comment-233077 But in addition to this i would like to let you know our most pressing points in the new UI: Link Style : Almost all of our 800 users are mad about the fact that the links are not recogizable as such. There is no difference in color or an underline to mark a link. You have always to hover the mouse over it to see the link/funktion. I had to answer countless phone calls to explain where to find some functions. Pull Down Menus : Prior to JIRA 4.1 all possible functions has been displayed in one column on the left. Now you have a few actions in the "action bar" and others in the pull down menu. This is a serious drawback for many of our users, because they don't see the actions at once and have to search for them. I know that there are keyboard shortcuts for many of the actions, but our userbase is "mouse driven". They want to see (the link), not to remember (the shortcut).
          Hide
          Jason Hubbard added a comment -

          Apologies up front if there is a better place to post this. Is this issue still being tracked? We recently upgraded from 4.1.2 to 4.4.3 and the UI seems to have gotten worse not better.

          There is no clear definition between sections. This is true in the Administration section as well.

          I understand it being difficult to make all users happy but in a fast paced business environment you need to be able to find what you are looking for quickly to get your job done. The current UI does not help to do this, the old 3.13 UI did.

          Taking a page out of Microsoft's book and rearranging absolutely everything just because you can isn't the smartest idea either.

          • How many complaints were you receiving about the old UI that prompted changing it?
          • How many complaints have you received about the new UI?

          My guess is more complaints about the new UI. Forgive me if I'm beating a dead horse but I see the issue is still open and I couldn't find any clear answer as to when the UI concerns will really be addressed.

          Suggestions.
          Don't mess with your users. I've learned this through first hand knowledge in my career as a System Admin. Users hate it when you suddenly change things on them. Users find a way to use applications in a way that they are comfortable with and get very upset when you change it for no good reason. Adding keyboard shortcuts is a nice improvement, but it should be just that and only that, an addition to what already exists.

          Make it possible to skin(theme) the UI. Confluence has this feature why not Jira? This would give people the ability to customize it to their liking. This in my opinion should be the focus of UI improvements, stop changing things with each release. It doesn't make it easier to use. Honestly I'm too busy to relearn applications constantly. Not sure about others but for me the change from 4.1 to 4.4 was another learning curve trying to figure out where everything is in the Admin section. Now I've read that in 5.0 the Admin section is changing again. Maybe the changes in 5 will be great, but if they're not it will just anger people yet again.

          The only way you are going to please most people is to make it customizable. So if they don't like it they can make it look the way they want.

          Also, if you want to see a well organized view, look at Oracles support interface. When viewing a ticket everything is clearly separated. Ticket info, comments, available actions are all very easy to find.

          Jira truly is the best product I've used. Please continue to take user suggestions for feature requests and improvements and make them part of the main application.

          Show
          Jason Hubbard added a comment - Apologies up front if there is a better place to post this. Is this issue still being tracked? We recently upgraded from 4.1.2 to 4.4.3 and the UI seems to have gotten worse not better. There is no clear definition between sections. This is true in the Administration section as well. I understand it being difficult to make all users happy but in a fast paced business environment you need to be able to find what you are looking for quickly to get your job done. The current UI does not help to do this, the old 3.13 UI did. Taking a page out of Microsoft's book and rearranging absolutely everything just because you can isn't the smartest idea either. How many complaints were you receiving about the old UI that prompted changing it? How many complaints have you received about the new UI? My guess is more complaints about the new UI. Forgive me if I'm beating a dead horse but I see the issue is still open and I couldn't find any clear answer as to when the UI concerns will really be addressed. Suggestions. Don't mess with your users. I've learned this through first hand knowledge in my career as a System Admin. Users hate it when you suddenly change things on them. Users find a way to use applications in a way that they are comfortable with and get very upset when you change it for no good reason. Adding keyboard shortcuts is a nice improvement, but it should be just that and only that, an addition to what already exists. Make it possible to skin(theme) the UI. Confluence has this feature why not Jira? This would give people the ability to customize it to their liking. This in my opinion should be the focus of UI improvements, stop changing things with each release. It doesn't make it easier to use. Honestly I'm too busy to relearn applications constantly. Not sure about others but for me the change from 4.1 to 4.4 was another learning curve trying to figure out where everything is in the Admin section. Now I've read that in 5.0 the Admin section is changing again. Maybe the changes in 5 will be great, but if they're not it will just anger people yet again. The only way you are going to please most people is to make it customizable. So if they don't like it they can make it look the way they want. Also, if you want to see a well organized view, look at Oracles support interface. When viewing a ticket everything is clearly separated. Ticket info, comments, available actions are all very easy to find. Jira truly is the best product I've used. Please continue to take user suggestions for feature requests and improvements and make them part of the main application.
          Hide
          Thorsten Deuter added a comment -

          Great comment, Jason. I agree with your suggestions. Off Topic: Not only due to the UI I learned to fear new JIRA versions. That has been different 'til the end of 3.x.

          Show
          Thorsten Deuter added a comment - Great comment, Jason. I agree with your suggestions. Off Topic: Not only due to the UI I learned to fear new JIRA versions. That has been different 'til the end of 3.x.
          Hide
          Holger Schimanski added a comment -

          We are working now since several months with the new UI (coming from 3.13, then 4.2 and now 4.4). I have to say, that I realy like the new interface. And I like the upcoming improvements in 5.0, which also shows me, that Atlassian is continuing to work on the layout and improves it.

          I don't agree with your statements concerning sections. For me they are clearly separated especially in 5.0 (font size is reduced to normal level and spacing between section increased). And well definded collapsable. Separation between field labels and values are clear. Issue links are good in 4.4 and are getting great in 5.0.

          Kind regards
          Holger

          P.S. I agree, that the admin section start page is bad. It is made for ctrl-f, not for reading. But that is not scope of this issue...

          Show
          Holger Schimanski added a comment - We are working now since several months with the new UI (coming from 3.13, then 4.2 and now 4.4). I have to say, that I realy like the new interface. And I like the upcoming improvements in 5.0, which also shows me, that Atlassian is continuing to work on the layout and improves it. I don't agree with your statements concerning sections. For me they are clearly separated especially in 5.0 (font size is reduced to normal level and spacing between section increased). And well definded collapsable. Separation between field labels and values are clear. Issue links are good in 4.4 and are getting great in 5.0. Kind regards Holger P.S. I agree, that the admin section start page is bad. It is made for ctrl-f, not for reading. But that is not scope of this issue...
          Hide
          Matt Doar (ServiceRocket) added a comment -

          @jason from Oracle's support: "My Oracle Support requires Adobe Flash Player 9.0.115 or above." Hmm.

          Show
          Matt Doar (ServiceRocket) added a comment - @jason from Oracle's support: "My Oracle Support requires Adobe Flash Player 9.0.115 or above." Hmm.

            People

            • Assignee:
              Unassigned
              Reporter:
              Matt Doar (ServiceRocket)
            • Votes:
              121 Vote for this issue
              Watchers:
              125 Start watching this issue

              Dates

              • Created:
                Updated: