first of all as background: I am using DT more and more again, mainly thanks to the combination of it being so powerful and intelligent (as was always the case), and really progressing in steady increments in terms of it´s speed, sync-reliability but also ever nicer UI. (so thx for that!)
As there is the standing percept that DT – in spite of all it´s functional beauty – is still a relict of past UI aesthetics (this characterization is to be found regularly in the web when DT is introduced / reviewed), I thought I take shots at that notion / issue in more concrete terms; one UI issue at a time, as I encounter them.
my first feedback in that regard:
I think DT could easily improve the cognitive / orientational ‘anchoring’ of users in terms of where they are currently at in terms of open DB (primary context).
currently there are two main indicators of which DB I am currently in – and both get totally lost and ‘drown’ in the surface of signs and information, for my taste (see attachment).
In the attached views there is actually a reduced amount of information (open panes; amount of documents etc,) – and it is still very hard to be reminded of where one is at currently. I think the second view, where the two indicators of the current DB are shown, illustrate quite well how invisible they are in normal circumstances (not being marked like in the second screenshot). Of course, when the sidepane is closed there only remains one indicator of my current logical location – and it is also quite invisible to the quickly scanning / browsing eyes (to my taste).
I think in a complex application, that allows for so many dynamic views, which has so many different informational fields / contexts, and where users can (thankfully) ‘float’ very easily between DBs and even different sets of DBs, it is quite important to signal where one currently actually ‘is’.
I also think this would be quite a ‘low hanging fruit’ in terms of making the UI much more modern and practical. Improving this one – important – detail would be effectively counterbalancing the whole ‘lost in database’ atmosphere one can get using DT…
First of all: it was feedback. No comparison of UIs
Then: ‘many’ is not all, neither does it say what is possible or desirable. And I would go for the other ones, the ones that clearly work better - like Things. (Just off the top of my head; and I think Things quite clearly is an acknowledged ‘UI-leader’ in the wider community…).
Also: DEVONthink is not like ‘many other apps’ in my opinion. I already hinted that it has a unique database character and is actually a mix of DB, Notes, Archive, Viewer, MAM, PKM, … and a few others. (I did not want to open this very basic discussion here; and also just assumed that this is not necessary in the DT forum). Practically speaking, as I said, this results in a much denser and more complex user interface than any of the applications (especially the Finder). I think a look at the screenshots (or your own DT) makes this clear…
As for your Finder comparison: I do not think it’s really comparable (see above) - and indeed ‘looking like the Finder’ is one of the main problems with working in parallel with many apps (that ‘look like the Finder’). But even if you look at your screenshot (#2), you see ‘Documents’ there much more clearly than the DB name within DT (as again seen in my screenshots). So even this Finder example already looks better (because of the size of the location; but also because of the overall look and cleanliness / simplicity compared to DT)
… and theoretically: yes, the Finder could also be improved. That’s why there’s PathFinder, ForkLift, etc. (- not to mention some shots of reworking the Finder much more fundamentally, working with spatial metaphors, visual browsing paradigms, etc.)
I would suggest that the question is simply asked this way, or better asked/approached this way:
Do you yourself believe that DT shows you where you currently are in terms of DB – for a quick glance, or in terms of swiftly browsing the DT-UI?! - If so, then I accept that as alternative feedback. For me, it doesn’t. That’s the feedback I wanted to give. Quite simply.
(Offtopic: Found this image via startpage.com, it’s from @DanielWessel’s blog. Daniel, thanks for “Organizing creativity”! I thought I lost my copy but turns out I still got it. Will reread it!)
And DEVONthink 3 (at least the beta) showed the same info:
Not sure whether this info was removed from DEVONthink after the beta or whether it was removed due to macOS changes (e.g. not enough free space anymore). I’m fine with DEVONthink’s path bar (although showing the database’s plus selected record’s name in the window title could still be useful).
But I can’t imagine how the path bar could be improved. What do you have in mind?
– yeah, you are right. I didn´t highlight this additional aspect, but DB-name was a sacrifice, it seems, when DEVON started consolidating the window and ‘bars to the max’.
(I also noticed ‘grey’ as ‘highlight’ within the sidepane seems hardwired, and is not affected by systempreferences of accent color – unlike the highlighting of current folder/file on overview)
I am always cautious making too specific proposals on design issues (and some other things). While trying to be constructive, I do think real developers with their concepts do not really need or want people shouting at them such very concrete decision points…
… but I do think given the whole situation of very, very compresed ‘real-estate’, and also given the ‘monochromatic’ UI of small text fields, lines, panes + boxes anything in direction of font-size increase, boldness, (decent) coloring would already make a difference.
that would be my hunch. but anything that improves this is welcome, as DT really is one of those apps that can make your mind and orientation ‘float’
… it unfortunately doesn´t really change the overall experience on my end. telling me this is more about integrated UI optimization than changing one detail… (or, maybe over longer term ‘it sinks in’… I´ll keep it on to do some longterm subliminal magic… maybe.)
Anyways, really appreciate your attentiveness and active care! – Especially as you are probably not paid as service outlet for Devon here :-D. So, thx!
Call me stubborn – but I still see this as a basic miss of DT UI/UX and also a miss in the slowly improving UI trajectory: DT is such a complex DB-/Note-tool providing a) such a complex navigation (different DBs, sets thereof etc.) so many views (open seperate window, tabs etc.) – but it miserably fails to communicate clearly(!) – in the sense of a real visual cue (discernible, adequately sized and placed information) WHERE one currently is, or what one is currently looking at.
Nobody can tell me this is efficient UI, as to give me clear cues and orientation where I am at (esecially having in mind, any user will most probably have 1-5 or 10 of such windows/views open at any given time…):
I see this as one of the real curses of the app universe, especially where it is afflicting venerable apps: while there often is a focus in extending features and chasing bugs, some very obvious basics of UX are falling along the way…
—
*
* … aside from my (neccessarily idiosyncratic taxonomical syntax )
Thx @BLUEFROG – I am aware
This is actually obvious. Especially to long time users.
So, its safe to assume, I know this after more than a decade of DT use . The fact that I have to state that does actually indicates the scale of the problem.
Also, I was deliberately and obviously using UI/UX terms like “cue”, to mark the – very obvious – fact, that this is not easily visible. In other words this flies in the face of any logics/best practices of information hierarchies, and would surely fail any more or less scientific (or ‘subjective’) UX test – like First-Click Testing, 5 Sec Test, Tree Sorting, Navigation Stress Test, Eye Tracking etc pp. (Actually, I´ll take any bet on this.)
The simple fact you had to encase this otherwise not really segmented information in one of those red rectangles already tells the whole story better that I probably can… and if you go back to the begining/opening of my issue description you will also find your red rectangle in the form of an elipse, which I put there illustrating the nature of the problem.
So, that indicates, my point was about highlighting issues of legibility/navigability/orientation – as also indicated by the title of this thread (“on (not) seeing…”)
… plus: I am duly aware of the information density DT has to deal with, as part of its multifacetted nature. But I also do think, this issue of information hierarchy, challenges to orientation have to be pointed to, acknowledged, and should be openly adressed/tackled. (Possibly also make a survey, test group or anything to that effect…)
– So, I´d ask/propose to include this in any future review/iteration of UI-/UX-improvements.
Me, I’m quite happy with the User Interface and the User Experience for me is good. My focus is on the results of my DEVONthink manipulation–source documents, searching, editing, etc. I don’t spend a lot of time thinking about how to fix stuff. It just works. I wouldn’t be looking too hard for major changes to much of anything, but of course would not be against simple tweaks–as the DEVONthink staff have been doing for years.
I am aware some people here are happy with the status quo. This is quite well documented in the forums from a core group.
I am also personally glad it works for you personally.
But I don´t think that would justify disregarding a) other experiences; b) ways to (easily) improve UI/UX “for everyone” – which is actually what UI/UX tests + methodologies are for.
Also this is not about interface in general, but pointing to a very specific and obvious problem. So, let´s stay with that point of how easy it is to view where one currently is within the document + DB structure – which is why I opened this thread…
To clarify, I’m not disregarding other’s experiences or other ways to improve for everyone. I’m only saying what I think. I also think that beyond having this forum where there is post categories for “feedback” and “feature-request”, like you are participating here now, DEVONthink developers surely do not need a lot more surveys and test groups beyond what this forum communicates and their beta test activities. Just what i think. DEVONthink can decide for themselves. I’m not trying to tell others what to think. Consider this my responding to a request for survey.
I really didn´t “call” for a survey as primary or only way of dealing with this, but just pointed to the fact any such point like “ease of navigation” and “context-cuing” (“where am I currently in the system?!”) should be treated in some systematic way, incorporating user experiences, or some methodology…
I also pointed to a very specific and ‘local’ issue in the UI. (see initial post)
Making surveys or teardown of the overall UI the main point really just sidetracks from the core issue/intent of the thread.
To stay on the practical side/substance of it, I think in terms of motif and motivation my point/point of this thread is very much related to this one (on Pathbar navigation and visibility). So, conceptually, this could be ‘bundled’. It´s another one not really questioning DT as a system/culture but raising a (structurally) very similar practical and specific UI issue.
)
. The fact that I have to state that does actually indicates the scale of the problem.