Re: Launching our new website

[Michael Tremer <michael.tremer@ipfire.org>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 12786 bytes --]

Hello Robin,

> On 9 Jan 2024, at 15:43, Robin Roevens <robin.roevens(a)disroot.org> wrote:
> 
> Hi Michael
> 
> Michael Tremer schreef op ma 08-01-2024 om 17:07 [+0000]:
>> Hello Robin,
>> 
>>> On 7 Jan 2024, at 23:19, Robin Roevens <robin.roevens(a)disroot.org>
>>> wrote:
>>> 
>>> Hello Michael, all
>>> 
>>> 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 wherever 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.
> 
> I have the same problem..:-)
> 
>> 
>> Let’s put this on the list for some rewording, but if there is no
>> time before the launch, this isn’t severe enough to stop the launch.
>> It is at least better than what we had before.
> 
> I agree.
> 
>> 
>>> 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’t focus only on one group, but I generally avoid talking
>> about “home users” when possible. The reason simply is that people
>> misunderstand this and I get emails that say “Is it already possible
>> to use IPFire in a business? Is it stable enough?”.
>> 
>> The media also likes to write articles like “IPFire on Raspberry Pi
>> X” and so people tend to think this is a toy project only.
> 
> The nostalgic tux logo probably didn't help either. :-)
> 
>> 
>> Emphasising more on enterprise is my way to compensate for it.
> 
> I understand. I was not aware of it being perceived as a toy project by
> some. 
> 
>> 
>>> 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? 
>> 
>> 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 “that is the one that we tested and we now use it for all our
>> customers”. And I don’t have to say how stupid that is.
>> 
>> Sometimes people send me emails asking for an older download link.
> 
> I agree with not making it too obvious where to find older versions. 
> 
> But not everyone keeps it's instance always up-to-date, even I have
> skipped a version or two due to circumstances; And then I obviously
> like to check the release notes of all versions I missed up until the
> last. So those previous release notes (and not the downloads
> themselves) should be easily found from the latest release notes, as I
> wouldn't intuitively go to the blog for that. (I don't associate blog
> automatically with release announcements. In the end I would most
> probably find them, but it wouldn't be my first idea to go search for
> them there.)
> 
> I think it might be better to separate the release notes and the
> download links to the related versions. Instead just provide a link to
> "the" download page which just or at least prominently offers you to
> download the latest version. 
> And an "archive" page somewhere more "hidden", with a big fat warning
> on top, that it is insecure and totally not recommended to use an older
> version, and just a clean (unattractive) list of links to downloads of
> older versions.
> The links in the blog posts would hence always point to the download
> page offering the latest version prominently, and serve better as an
> archive of release notes than as an archive of older versions as it
> currently is.
> Or something like that...?

The download button on the release announcements will always lead you to that release, and not the latest one.

I agree that the blog is not the first place to look, but people will find it I am sure.

We used to have a “news” section on the page before we merged that and the “planet” into a new blog. I suppose any version that we go with has its downsides.

>> 
>>> 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’t use it
>> and we don’t have that many posts that its too easy to lose track.
> 
> Agreed, it was just an idea to be able to easily implement an overview
> of older release notes for that "older release notes" links I suggested
> earlier :-)
> 
> Regards
> Robin
> 
>> 
>>> 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 :-).
>>> 
>>> See below for my findings about to red color usage...
>>> 
>>> Michael Tremer schreef op zo 07-01-2024 om 14:29 [+0000]:
>>>> Hello Tom,
>>>> 
>>>>> On 7 Jan 2024, at 01:47, Tom Rymes <tom(a)rymes.net> wrote:
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>>> On Jan 6, 2024, at 9:03 AM, Michael Tremer
>>>>>> <michael.tremer(a)ipfire.org> wrote:
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Hello Tom,
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Thank you for your feedback!
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> On 4 Jan 2024, at 23:44, Tom Rymes <tom(a)rymes.net> wrote:
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> I really like it at first glance, though the red used in
>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>> banner on this page (and I think it’s all over the place, I
>>>>>>> just didn’t confirm) is too close to magenta to my eyes.
>>>>>>> It’s
>>>>>>> bright, but more tropical flower than fire, IMHO (it
>>>>>>> clashes a
>>>>>>> bit with the fire video on the homepage).
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Is it a bad thing to be close to magenta?
>>>>> 
>>>>> Not at all, it’s the juxtaposition of the video and the color
>>>>> that
>>>>> clashed, in my opinion.
>>>>> 
>>>>> The two aren’t near each other on the homepage, but if you load
>>>>> the
>>>>> homepage and then click on another page, the magenta is right
>>>>> where
>>>>> the video was, so they’re adjacent while on different pages, in
>>>>> a
>>>>> way.
>>>> 
>>>> Ah yes, that makes sense, depending on what page you are clicking
>>>> next.
>>>> 
>>>>>> 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’t have calibrated screens (brightness
>>>>>> and
>>>>>> contrast up all the way)
>>>>> 
>>>>> 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’t be in big, broad patches covering large sections of
>>>>> screen? I’ll leave that for the experts!
>>>> 
>>>> On my screen it looks fine without burning my eyes.
>>> 
>>> 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. 
>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 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.
>>> 
>>> This is too much. I really can't even watch this page without
>>> keeping
>>> my eyes half closed.
>>> 
>>> 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.
>>> 
>>> 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.
>>> 
>>> 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
>>> 
>>>> -Michael
>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> Tom
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>> 
>>> -- 
>>> Dit bericht is gescanned op virussen en andere gevaarlijke
>>> inhoud door MailScanner en lijkt schoon te zijn.
>> 
>> 
>> 
> 
> -- 
> Dit bericht is gescanned op virussen en andere gevaarlijke
> inhoud door MailScanner en lijkt schoon te zijn.