161–170 of 358 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You can participate in the Thunderbird UX discussions on Topicbox (and also through email) and provide your suggestions/critiques at https://thunderbird.topicbox.com/groups/ux
Do they listen to the opinions of random newcomers?
I appreciate that they have maintained information density. otoh I think they should try and stick as much as possible to the looks of the OS where thunderbird is running - you are building a desktop application, not a website. Of course it's pretty hard when not even microsoft seems to know what Windows should look like.
The tone and level of entitlement of some comments is astonishing. Thunderbird is a free and open source tool, used by many (including me). The least we can do is to be a little nicer.
Maintainers are the unsung heroes of the software world, pouring their hearts into creating vast amounts of value that often goes unappreciated. These unsung heroes perform critical work that enables all of modern technology to function – this is not an exaggeration. These tireless individuals dedicate themselves to writing new features, fixing bugs, answering user inquiries, improving documentation, and developing innovative new software, yet they receive almost no recognition for their efforts.
The tone and level of entitlement of some comments is astonishing. Thunderbird is a free and open source tool, used by many (including me). The least we can do is to be a little nicer.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Oh wow that's a huge difference. The first one looks like polished quality software while the second one looks like some junky app made by a solo dev on his free time that doesn't care how it looks like
I like the second one better. Much better contrast and less useless whitespace. I can't see what's wrong with it but I'm also not experienced in UI/UX. Edit: Also the icons are much better in the second one. The first one has all monochrome icons which makes them much less useful for quickly scanning for the folder that you are looking for.
I hope I can opt back into the more dense display that we currently have. Some other parts look quite nice however.
I’ve found it odd not everyone uses it this way. There’s no better way to blast through an inbox that has let 500+ pile up, and can through and organize it.
One feature I’ve always dreamed of was a column for sender domain, which could be used to sort as well.
I appreciate that they have maintained information density. otoh I think they should try and stick as much as possible to the looks of the OS where thunderbird is running - you are building a desktop application, not a website. Of course it's pretty hard when not even microsoft seems to know what Windows should look like.
Remind you, that Microsoft wants go get rid of its Microsoft Office and will make it a Website only.
Microsoft positions Outlook for big corporate customers. They often need extensibility in their clients. Preferably you implement them only once to run on any client (web, Windows, macOS, Linux, mobile, ...)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Microsoft Outlook is already a web app at its core: "The point here being that Mail and Calendar are native Windows applications, whereas the new Outlook for Windows is essentially a web app at its core, from what we can tell." Native is dead as it seems, at least for he Microsoft Office Team. https://www.theregister.com/2023/06/20/microsoft_calendar_ma...
Someone correct me if wrong but "outlook for windows" is not the same as "office outlook". The first one seems like it was created to fill the hole of outlook express and the mail app that came out later. i.e. the free email application that windows ships with.
1. Outlook desktop - old MFC / win32 crapfest
2. Windows Mail / Calendar - new WPF crapfest.
3. O365 online outlook / outlook.com - fat web app.
4. "New" Outlook - this is a fat Electron style app based on the web app.
The latter is actually pretty good - been using it for a couple of months. This is apparently going to replace all the other ones on the desktop.