UI proposal - feedback requested

[Max]

Hey folks, we are beginning our UI overhaul. Almost none of this will be in v28 since we have a lot of overhaul to do and want to release it all simultaneously. However, before we put 6 months into this we want to be sure we're on the right track. So, here's our thoughts - let us know your feedback.

Paradigms
Currently our dialogs are all over the map, but they suffer a few common problems:
1. You can see info you can't use - think seeing a grayed out draft angle in the Extrude Boss dialog that you can't interact with until you click the checkmark.
2. Dialog flow is often wonky - some have 2 columns and you have to switch back and forth around the dialog to get what you want.
3. Spacing and styling has a lot of consistency problems

Our new paradigm aims to fix these issues. Let's jump into what it might look like:


From this you might notice a few things:
1. The flow is top to bottom.
2. You are not shown anything you cannot use - UI is exposed as you indicated you need more functionality. For example, if you click Draft, the Draft Angle checkbox is shown.
3. There is much more consistency with fonts, spacing
4. They are theme responsive.


From a higher level, these would be dockable in the work area - to the right hand side or to the right side of the Design Explorer. Or, you can drag them around and place them as you like, similar to what we have today.

We are considering some bits of customization, for example you might find the above examples to be easy on the eyes but you want things to be closer together - we might implement a "Compact Mode" that tightens the margins of the controls, for example, but we are unsure if people want things like that. Large dialogs will have a scroll bar, most likely.

Here are a few examples of some dialog mockups (we haven't coded this yet), some docked, some floating, in various states of expansion:













Let us know your thoughts and if there is anything else you can think of from a UI/UX perspective for this project that you think would make a positive impact.

 

[stepalibre]

Wow . Looks great to me!

 

[stepalibre]

Will the new UI scale with the Design Tree in the system options?

 

[Ken226]

Looks good to me.

So, the Thin Wall checkbox would do away with the need for a separate Thin Extrude button on the ribbon, simplifying the UI?

Am I correct to assume that there will also be other places where something like a dialog box check will be replacing other ribbon buttons, or otherwise simplifying the UI?

An example would be the theme selection buttons. They aren't difficult to find in current location on the ribbon, but seems more intuitive that they would be in the System Options > Color Scheme dialog.

 

[NateLiquidGravity]

@Max instead of using check boxes like that you should use a custom control similar to the expand/contract one currently used for assembly constraints. This tells the user that there are more options that can be seen.


I made a custom one very similar when I made my Frame Builder. It could expand/contract (+/-) or be used for selecting and expanding an option. It was based on a radio button instead of a checkbox because I wanted to switch between a group of options that couldn't coexist - but a checkbox could easily be used.

 

[stepalibre]

. I meant will the scale of the Design Tree match the new UI so it looks consistent at any scale.

 

[albie0803]

You could vertically compress it a bit

 

[Cator]

A good starting point!
1)Will the icon replace fx everywhere in the program?
2) When you make an extrusion, could you at least memorize the last type you used in To Depth, To All etc...?

 

[HaroldL]

Looks promising, but a few questions...

1. What do the 'plus/minus' button and the chain button do?
2. If you select the Dual Depth option it will only show the fields for entering data and not allow or give any new functions to the dual depth like up to surface or to geometry?
3. The Along normal could be confusing since it doesn't show any field to select another vector like the current dialog does. Maybe an"Other" button along side the Along normal.
4. Docking sounds good but is it dialog specific? That is do all dialogs need to be docked or undocked to have the same behavior?

I'll probably think of more later but that's it for now. I'd have to see the rest of the dialogs as they get created.

 

[JimCad]

Hi Max,
I'll leave the comments to the more experienced users except to say that I hate Dark Themes.
I think the blue one in picture one is best for Me although it is quite large even for my "old man's eyes".
I really appreciate that you ask the users for their thoughts on these things. Not like some of the other Cad providers.
Jim
PS as a new user I'll just adapt to whatever is decided. I know you'll get plenty of feedback on here so I expect good things.
Then I'll have to pay maintenance again to get the latest.

 

[tyc]

-It looks great to eye.
-It blends really well with the rest of the software. Gives me feel of quality.
-Nice modern font. All accent colors are nice.
-Docking and compact mode would be beneficial considering users with smaller screens.
-I would like to be able to browse through the lists, buttons, text boxes using the Tab key, and manipulate all of them using Spacebar/Up-Down Arrows in the order as they are shown in the dialog box. Currently, the order isn't consistent. and some options are skipped when Tab key used. example hole wizard.
-I agree with @Cator on memorizing the last type used in To Depth, To All. This would be a time saving feature.
-Well thought having thin features in the same dialog as the standard features. But please don't merge Boss and Cut functions in same dialog, like in Autodesk Inventor It's a nightmare when software thinks it should boss extrude when you are really trying to cut extrude.

That's all for now.
Great job team!

 

[JimCad]

But please don't merge Boss and Cut functions in same dialog, like in Autodesk Inventor It's a nightmare when software thinks it should boss extrude when you are really trying to cut extrude.

That's all for now.
Great job team!

I see your point but never found it a problem.
I'm just learning Alibre so I'll adapt to it whichever way it works.
Jim

 

[DavidJ]

Hiding stuff that isn't currently in use can mean that people don't ever realise it exists - in the example, unless you already know it isn't obvious that unchecking 'along normal' would open up an option to do something different.

People learning how to use the software, what options exist, where to find them is already the source of many queries to support.

The needs of a new user (especially if new to CAD) probably differ from those of someone familiar with the software. Having said that, there is likely no perfect compromise and we shouldn't confuse new users with too much information either....

 

[JimCad]

Hiding stuff that isn't currently in use can mean that people don't ever realise it exists - in the example, unless you already know it isn't obvious that unchecking 'along normal' would open up an option to do something different.

People learning how to use the software, what options exist, where to find them is already the source of many queries to support.

The needs of a new user (especially if new to CAD) probably differ from those of someone familiar with the software. Having said that, there is likely no perfect compromise and we shouldn't confuse new users with too much information either....

I'm easily confused.

 

[Stu3d]

"2. You are not shown anything you cannot use" - as mentioned above it is good to see all available options because a more efficient way of achieving something may become obvious, especially when learning the software.
I personally dislike scroll bars.
If a major UI overhaul is due it would be great to have some preference options or persistance in things like project to sketch. I have noticed in the recent very helpful Youtube tutorials maintain association is nearly always selected.
I will be upgrading from V23 soon so look forward to all the enhancements in the previous and future releases.

 

[Ex Machina]

I would say the following.

1) Instead of an "Along Normal" always being checked and unchecking it to show additional options, I would put an "Along Direction" option there and have it unchecked as default. It is more intuitive to check something to open up additional options.
2) The ± icon could also refer to tolerances and might confuse newcomers. I understand that you want the reverse to be a button and not a checkbox, but I think this is a good candidate to carry over the existing one.
3) The hyperlink icon also could be confusing. It means something else in MS Office, for example. The f(x) icon was fine I think.

My thoughts...

 

[Toybuilder]

My take:

Please do not make a UI that require you to read the words or have the UI elements dynamically move up/down all the time. If you are going to have dynamic changes, make as much of the fixed items in one place as possible, and make the dynamic expansion happen in a separate tabbed section.

Ideally, the controls would be like on an aircraft control panel -- you should be able to operate it blind, or describe to a person what to push/pull/turn/set without without difficulty because it is always consistent.

I realize that you might want to "dumb down the interface" to make things seem simple and approachable for new users. But that makes it a pain for power users that want to quickly be productive through muscle-memory actions.

 

[gwbruce]

Ok, I'll throw my 2 cents in the ring. I like the concept of what @Max is proposing in the new UI. My only suggestions are that 1. all of the dialog boxes work the same. If they have a close button put them all in the same place. 2. if I have to put focus on a window inside of the dialog box, ie: fillet window to pick the edges make it turn blue to indicate that it is active. Currently some turn blue and some don't. 3. make all dialog boxes work the same. Either use the "tab" key to accept values or use the "enter" key. Currently some work with tab and some with enter. I like the concept of the information working in a sequential order. When the order is completed you should end up at the OK or close button which ever is required. Just some thoughts from my experience from working with different CAD systems. I really appreciate Alibre asking us what we think. At least we get to put in our thoughts. Always a good idea to involve the operators when making any process changes.

 

[bolsover]

The proposed layouts appear nice and 'clean' style - which I like.

1 The main issue I have with current V27 dialogs is that they are (mostly) fixed size. This is a complete PITA when the dialog itself contains a list of selected items (such as the fillet dialog). It's OK when just one a couple of edges or faces are selected but on my system once there are more than 4 the selection list starts to scroll - making it almost impossible to keep track of selections.

2 Docking - TBH I can't see much value; with the majority of dialogs, I just run through to the OK (or Cancel) button and that's all. There are a few exceptions.. It might be nice to have the color (can we get a UK version with correct spelling please?) dialog dockable and allow drag/drop of colours to part /assembly. Ability to dock the EE would certainly be a bonus.

3 Theme - great to have a new modern theme - but with a plea for transparency settings - so many times while sketching the context menu pops up over the very thing I need to see!

Great work.

David

 

[Max]

So, the Thin Wall checkbox would do away with the need for a separate Thin Extrude button on the ribbon, simplifying the UI?

Yes

Will the new UI scale with the Design Tree in the system options?

No

Am I correct to assume that there will also be other places where something like a dialog box check will be replacing other ribbon buttons, or otherwise simplifying the UI?

There might be other consolidations. For example we don't really need 2 chamfer tools, so that might be an obvious example of something we would evaluate.

You could vertically compress it a bit

We may, or we may provide the ability to have a "compact view" of the dialogs that has more compression if you like.

1. What do the 'plus/minus' button and the chain button do?
2. If you select the Dual Depth option it will only show the fields for entering data and not allow or give any new functions to the dual depth like up to surface or to geometry?
3. The Along normal could be confusing since it doesn't show any field to select another vector like the current dialog does. Maybe an"Other" button along side the Along normal.
4. Docking sounds good but is it dialog specific? That is do all dialogs need to be docked or undocked to have the same behavior?

1. That replaces the "Reverse" checkboxes
2. Currently it will mirror the functionality we have today.
3. If you uncheck along normal, a new field is shown to allow you to select one.
4. I'm unsure of this at this point in time.

But please don't merge Boss and Cut functions in same dialog, like in Autodesk Inventor

We won't, despite me really wanting to This is a case where I know it will invoke wraith.

1) Instead of an "Along Normal" always being checked and unchecking it to show additional options, I would put an "Along Direction" option there and have it unchecked as default. It is more intuitive to check something to open up additional options.
2) The ± icon could also refer to tolerances and might confuse newcomers. I understand that you want the reverse to be a button and not a checkbox, but I think this is a good candidate to carry over the existing one.
3) The hyperlink icon also could be confusing. It means something else in MS Office, for example. The f(x) icon was fine I think.

1. Yeah, generally I think we want to "opt in" to more options versus "opt out" - so the default states are unchecked in other words. I was thinking about this earlier.
2. Someone else brought this up just today - that icons is temporary.
3. That icon is temporary, but it will likely be some kind of link icon. We'll see.

Please do not make a UI that require you to read the words or have the UI elements dynamically move up/down all the time. If you are going to have dynamic changes, make as much of the fixed items in one place as possible, and make the dynamic expansion happen in a separate tabbed section.

We may consider the ability to pin sections of the UI to allow them to persist. If you always use Draft, for example, maybe you always want to see it.

Hiding stuff that isn't currently in use can mean that people don't ever realise it exists

I hear you. We aren't hiding concepts - just data inputs for the concepts you may not be using at the time. We'll monitor this closely when we start making more dialogs and post them for feedback.