From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Michael Tremer To: development@lists.ipfire.org Subject: Re: Launching our new website Date: Mon, 08 Jan 2024 17:07:09 +0000 Message-ID: <0BC66C73-7731-405D-A807-05664D3724C3@ipfire.org> In-Reply-To: <320d812a64eef0410b043d94b9e943857a1b1da2.camel@sicho.home> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============6808132939110364542==" List-Id: --===============6808132939110364542== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hello Robin, > On 7 Jan 2024, at 23:19, Robin Roevens wrote: >=20 > Hello Michael, all >=20 > Overall I like the new layout and contents of the new site. The front > page is attractive, compact and I think informs one just enough to push > them to click on that Learn more button. I find it almost too empty... > The latest release notice on top of the page is also nice. > And I really like the new logo with the red "_". It does hurt a bit > somewhere deep to see the nostalgic tux go, but I admit that it does > look a bit too 90s. :-) Indeed. A little bit bittersweet :) > The new about page also looks nice and is not too verbose at first, but > I do like the full feature list at the bottom of the page. This is > information that may not be too important for a manager, but a nice > feature for anyone with a more technical background that is scouting > for a new/replacement firewall product and doesn't want to spend time > diving into documentation to find out what IPFire is technically > capable off. Here it is now nicely summarized. Very good! This is what we wanted. > I do have to note that in the upper part I have a few problems with the > wording in: > "We securely connect your employees to their desks at home, your global > business partners and the infrastructure in your data centre, giving > you maximum flexibility so that you can focus on what really matters." > I had to re-read the sentence a few times and I'm still not sure what > you exactly mean? Maybe I should have used ChatGPT for this :) The intention is to explain that people can connect to their office from wher= ever they are in the world so that they can work as if they were sat at their= desks. And on top comes that this works for businesses of all sizes. > Are we connecting employees working at home to their office desk? or > employees working at the office to their home desk (which I don't think > is a big pro for many bosses, at least not the ones I worked for) > And are we connecting your global business partners to the > infractructure in your data centre, or are we connecting employees to > global business partners, and to the infrastructure ? All of the above?! :) > (I know that all is possible with IPFire, but the current wording > strikes me as too vague or unclear as it can be interpreted in many > ways (at least to me :-))) Sometimes I spent a long time getting these things right. After many versions= , it happens that the result is simply crap. Sorry. Let=E2=80=99s put this on the list for some rewording, but if there is no tim= e before the launch, this isn=E2=80=99t severe enough to stop the launch. It = is at least better than what we had before. > And at last, I miss any mention of "the home user"; only "the employee" > is addressed explicitly giving the impression that it is an enterprise > only product or at least focused especially to enterprises. Which is > not the case, I think? So, I think, if the employee is addressed, the > home user should be mentioned also or neither should be. No, we don=E2=80=99t focus only on one group, but I generally avoid talking a= bout =E2=80=9Chome users=E2=80=9D when possible. The reason simply is that pe= ople misunderstand this and I get emails that say =E2=80=9CIs it already poss= ible to use IPFire in a business? Is it stable enough?=E2=80=9D. The media also likes to write articles like =E2=80=9CIPFire on Raspberry Pi X= =E2=80=9D and so people tend to think this is a toy project only. Emphasising more on enterprise is my way to compensate for it. > Also on the Easy to use part, as a technical user I would like to also > read that access to the Linux shell (or "CLI" is maybe more attractive > to more Microsoft-minded users) for the "power user" is only a click > away. (Referencing to the "enable SSH" setting in the WUI, but adding a > SSH console in the WUI is maybe also an idea worth exploring sometime > :-)) Is that not on the long feature list? > The latest Release notes on the download page is also a really nice > addition. Maybe a link "Older release notes..." which redirects to the > blog would also be nice as I wouldn't intuitively go for the blog link > in the main menu when looking for an overview of older release notes. > But I think the current blog does mostly cover for an older release > notes overview page?=20 I thought about this: A button to go to a previous release. But then I threw = this away, because people tend to install old versions, because =E2=80=9Cthat= is the one that we tested and we now use it for all our customers=E2=80=9D. = And I don=E2=80=99t have to say how stupid that is. Sometimes people send me emails asking for an older download link. > The blog page also looks nice and clean. I find it too clean. Maybe even too empty?! There is a lot of white. > An idea maybe, if easily implemented, is to add tags to blog posts > "release", "stable", "testing", "feature", "general", ... and the > ability to filter on those tags. The blog has this functionality and I threw it away. We didn=E2=80=99t use it= and we don=E2=80=99t have that many posts that its too easy to lose track. > This way you could set a filter on > "stable" and "release" tags when clicked on the above proposed "Older > release notes" link on the download page :-). >=20 > See below for my findings about to red color usage... >=20 > Michael Tremer schreef op zo 07-01-2024 om 14:29 [+0000]: >> Hello Tom, >>=20 >>> On 7 Jan 2024, at 01:47, Tom Rymes wrote: >>>=20 >>>=20 >>>=20 >>>> On Jan 6, 2024, at 9:03 AM, Michael Tremer >>>> wrote: >>>>=20 >>>> =EF=BB=BFHello Tom, >>>>=20 >>>> Thank you for your feedback! >>>>=20 >>>>> On 4 Jan 2024, at 23:44, Tom Rymes wrote: >>>>>=20 >>>>> I really like it at first glance, though the red used in the >>>>> banner on this page (and I think it=E2=80=99s all over the place, I >>>>> just didn=E2=80=99t confirm) is too close to magenta to my eyes. It=E2= =80=99s >>>>> bright, but more tropical flower than fire, IMHO (it clashes a >>>>> bit with the fire video on the homepage). >>>>=20 >>>> Is it a bad thing to be close to magenta? >>>=20 >>> Not at all, it=E2=80=99s the juxtaposition of the video and the color that >>> clashed, in my opinion. >>>=20 >>> The two aren=E2=80=99t near each other on the homepage, but if you load t= he >>> homepage and then click on another page, the magenta is right where >>> the video was, so they=E2=80=99re adjacent while on different pages, in a >>> way. >>=20 >> Ah yes, that makes sense, depending on what page you are clicking >> next. >>=20 >>>> What I did get as negative feedback before was that the red is >>>> quite bright (as in: burns your eyes). I use Apple devices which >>>> have generally good colour representation and this feedback came >>>> from people that didn=E2=80=99t have calibrated screens (brightness and >>>> contrast up all the way) >>>=20 >>> This is a bit of an issue, I suppose, but less so. My observation >>> was more of a clash between the magenta and the fire colors. >>> Magenta is often a bit intense, but maybe that just means it >>> shouldn=E2=80=99t be in big, broad patches covering large sections of >>> screen? I=E2=80=99ll leave that for the experts! >>=20 >> On my screen it looks fine without burning my eyes. >=20 > I do have to concur that the current red is too bright for my eyes. It > is acceptable on the buttons and as text highlight color and such. But > the big banners do hurt my eyes.=20 >=20 >>=20 >> The login page (https://www.michael.dev.ipfire.org/login) and the >> error pages use the colour for the entire screen and feels alright to >> me. Definitely a statement, but that is kind of what I was going for. >=20 > This is too much. I really can't even watch this page without keeping > my eyes half closed. >=20 > I do have to note that it is currently night-time, it is dark, the > light is dim and my desktop theme has switched to dark mode. So the > contrast with the bright red may be too much. > But my monitor brightness adjusts automatically to environmental light > and is also quite dim at this moment and also has auto 'intelligent' > color correction (I checked if it made much difference to the red with > that setting off, but it didn't). > I also checked with "nighttime colors" (very warm colors, white is > almost yellow.) But the red login page stays too bright for me to look > at. > Maybe I can look at it with my eyes fully open at daytime. But I'm not > sure we want a website that is only comfortable to visit during > daytime. >=20 > Generally I do like darker colors, like the previous maroon, and I may > be a bit too sensitive for brightness/color intensity (had my eyes > lasered in the past, which can be a factor to that). But I assume there > are people that are more sensitive to these things than me. So I'm far > from convinced that this color is a good choice. >=20 > On my mobile phone the color on the banners is not as disturbing as on > my desktop. It would not be my favorite, but I could live with it. But > also here the login page is too much; I don't have to squeeze my eyes > yet, but it is still very intense for me to look at. Noted. > Robin >=20 >> -Michael >>=20 >>>=20 >>> Tom >>=20 >>=20 >>=20 >=20 > --=20 > Dit bericht is gescanned op virussen en andere gevaarlijke > inhoud door MailScanner en lijkt schoon te zijn. --===============6808132939110364542==--