Jump to content

old vs new dashboard


Fah-Troop

Recommended Posts

Is headquarters not supporting the old dashboard anymore?  I like to use the Find caches near your location and see what's around me, it will show a page BUT WHEN YOU attempt to look at the next page it is stuck on the first page only.  The find caches near you isn't on the new dash board, despite all my request to include it.    So sometime newer isn't always better.  Any help would be appreciated

FAH-Troop

Jon

Link to comment
1 hour ago, Fah-Troop said:

Is headquarters not supporting the old dashboard anymore?  I like to use the Find caches near your location and see what's around me, it will show a page BUT WHEN YOU attempt to look at the next page it is stuck on the first page only. 

 

I use the old dashboard but never use the link to find caches near me (I use GSAK to select caches we want to do). I now tried it and it works just fine, next page and all.

The reason it works is, like most of the "broken" things on the site, that I'm using Tampermonkey and GClh II. It adds a lot of functionality the site should have but hasn't.

BTW, it removes the blue banner linking to the new dashboard too.

 

  • Helpful 1
  • Love 1
Link to comment
3 hours ago, Fah-Troop said:

Is headquarters not supporting the old dashboard anymore?  I like to use the Find caches near your location and see what's around me, it will show a page BUT WHEN YOU attempt to look at the next page it is stuck on the first page only.  The find caches near you isn't on the new dash board, despite all my request to include it.    So sometime newer isn't always better.  Any help would be appreciated

FAH-Troop

Jon

 

That sounds like the same problem that's happening in a number of spots on the site. It seems to only happen if you're using Internet Explorer or Edge as your browser. If you have another browser you can use like Firefox or Chrome, it should work as expected in those.

  • Upvote 1
  • Helpful 1
Link to comment
1 hour ago, fizzymagic said:

New is vastly inferior.  There is stuff you can't get to from there, which is annoying.

That is so true, the new is very, very inferior.

Then when you click on the map on a cache page it takes AGES to load and only shows that cache, not the others around it, WHICH I WANT TO SEE. Weirdly though, if you move the map, it still shows the caches around your home. But what the heck, I'm not looking there, I'm looking where the cache is I clicked on.  "Browse geocaches' is what works. By being very slow to load and not showing all the caches, the new map is broken for me.

  • Upvote 4
  • Helpful 1
Link to comment
13 minutes ago, Goldenwattle said:

That is so true, the new is very, very inferior.

Then when you click on the map on a cache page it takes AGES to load and only shows that cache, not the others around it, WHICH I WANT TO SEE. Weirdly though, if you move the map, it still shows the caches around your home. But what the heck, I'm not looking there, I'm looking where the cache is I clicked on.  "Browse geocaches' is what works. By being very slow to load and not showing all the caches, the new map is broken for me.

 

It seems strange that often the justification for these new pages is to eliminate legacy code which is difficult to maintain, yet the new pages are only ever half-finished with functionality either missing or not working properly, so the old page is kept on in perpetuity.

  • Upvote 2
  • Helpful 2
  • Love 2
Link to comment
51 minutes ago, Goldenwattle said:

That is so true, the new is very, very inferior.

Then when you click on the map on a cache page it takes AGES to load and only shows that cache, not the others around it, WHICH I WANT TO SEE. Weirdly though, if you move the map, it still shows the caches around your home. But what the heck, I'm not looking there, I'm looking where the cache is I clicked on.  "Browse geocaches' is what works. By being very slow to load and not showing all the caches, the new map is broken for me.

New map is a joke. AFAIK the justification for the change was to reduce server load but that's like driving around at night without your lights on to save petrol.

 

If it doesn't work, saving a percent or two is pointless.

  • Upvote 2
  • Funny 1
  • Helpful 2
  • Love 1
Link to comment

Ah the map discussion again. Remember the new map is a search plotter, not a map browser. Move it, it doesn't update. They could add an option to re-query and re-execute the search with every move, but that would be back to adding load to the servers. The problem is its use is not clearly explained and it implies it does something it doesn't do.

But the map isn't the thread topic =P

 

3 hours ago, barefootjeff said:

It seems strange that often the justification for these new pages is to eliminate legacy code which is difficult to maintain, yet the new pages are only ever half-finished with functionality either missing or not working properly, so the old page is kept on in perpetuity.

 

yup. That's at least how it seems.  Hard to know if HQ removes some functionality knowingly or is unaware of how some of us use the functions. =/  Sometimes it's nice of them to keep the old stuff around, and I'm sure they're keeping track of how many use the old pages, and how...

Link to comment
On 1/17/2020 at 10:50 PM, on4bam said:

 

I use the old dashboard but never use the link to find caches near me (I use GSAK to select caches we want to do). I now tried it and it works just fine, next page and all.

The reason it works is, like most of the "broken" things on the site, that I'm using Tampermonkey and GClh II. It adds a lot of functionality the site should have but hasn't.

BTW, it removes the blue banner linking to the new dashboard too.

 

Ditto, GDSAK & GC little helper II (and , of course tampermonkey and Firefox  ) do a great job,  when I do visit it's using the old dashboard, so my screen looks like on4bam's .

The 'new' dashboard adds nothing of any use to me.

I'd be very annoyed if the 'old' dashboard option vanished: that might well be the last straw ...

 

  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
On ‎1‎/‎17‎/‎2020 at 4:45 PM, barefootjeff said:

It seems strange that often the justification for these new pages is to eliminate legacy code which is difficult to maintain, yet the new pages are only ever half-finished with functionality either missing or not working properly, so the old page is kept on in perpetuity.

 

This is largely due to the development methodology they've chosen to use, but not fully implement.

 

As I understand it, they're using the Agile methodology. I'm not a developer, but my understanding is that under this methodology you roll out something as quickly as you can to the users, and then you iteratively refine the product to add functionality, account for user requests, fix bugs, etc. This explains why the product we're initially given often seems to be missing a lot of features.

 

They do seem to go through a few iterations, but then development just stops long before the project is actually completed and we're left with these partially-completed features. Why this is happening, we don't know. Is it project managers that don't understand the methodology? Is it higher-ups changing priorities? Is it a lack of resources? Does HQ sincerely consider these projects completed?

  • Helpful 1
  • Love 1
Link to comment
1 hour ago, The A-Team said:

 

This is largely due to the development methodology they've chosen to use, but not fully implement.

 

As I understand it, they're using the Agile methodology. I'm not a developer, but my understanding is that under this methodology you roll out something as quickly as you can to the users, and then you iteratively refine the product to add functionality, account for user requests, fix bugs, etc. This explains why the product we're initially given often seems to be missing a lot of features.

 

They do seem to go through a few iterations, but then development just stops long before the project is actually completed and we're left with these partially-completed features. Why this is happening, we don't know. Is it project managers that don't understand the methodology? Is it higher-ups changing priorities? Is it a lack of resources? Does HQ sincerely consider these projects completed?

 

We use an agile methodology during the *development* of a project.  Part of the final product may be rolled out for stakeholder review, but those components are *supposed* be functionally complete.  Once all of the pieces are complete it goes into production.   Partially competed features aren't typically included for a project already in production.  

  • Helpful 1
Link to comment
7 hours ago, rcm999 said:

The old pages are much better; less cluttered, simpler to navigate, better compatibility with MS Edge and other browsers.  "Nuff said.

 

The main issues I have with the new dashboard are:

  • Unnecessary whitespace
  • Poorly-prioritized navigation options
  • Poor performance (takes a while for changes to appear on the dashboard, at least the last time I checked)
  • Lack of cache type icons

If this project got reopened to deal with these issues, then I might actually start using the new dashboard.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment

Yes it's a case of use what you're used to. If you only ever used the new dashboard, its functionality and how you use it are 'normal'.  The additional features and the compact nature of the old do have additional value and usability, but if you've never used them then there's a learning curve, and if someone doesn't have a need to conquer the curve, the favour will always go to what you're used to. This happens everywhere, so it's not surprising that you're more comfortable with the New than the Old, regardless of what the Old has to offer.

 

And that plays well into HQ's possible attitude of "just leave it available as is, relegated to 2nd tier, without being updated, and eventually people will get around to stopping using it" because new users will always be starting with the New dashboard and end up used to it, preferring it.

 

As a web app developer, there are absolutely benefits in either the design or functionality of both dashboard that can and should be merged together. But that's unlikely to ever happen.

Edited by thebruce0
  • Upvote 3
Link to comment

I prefer the "old"  pretty-much everything.     It's not because of an unwillingness to change, it simply works better, and easier to use.    :)

Change should mean it's now easier to use.    "Change for the better".  

 - Few new functions have less "clicks" to access, or are an improvement over the "old". 

Two or more clicks that replace one isn't improvement (to me).

 

I like the way the functions are all to the right.  Many of those functions I still can't find in the "new" one.

"New" has a lot of unused white space.  "Old" has all the info in an easily viewed format that doesn't look empty.

The "new" doesn't look like it was ever finished. A beta that stayed...

 

On cache logs, the "new" log page has "Found It" as the default.  The only other options are DNF and Write Note.

On the "old" page,  all the options are chosen, and include NM and NA along with it.  That makes sense...

Unlike the "new", the "old" log has it's format functions up top and easily viewed.

Trackables in inventory on the "new" page are hidden, and you need to drop down to see them.  "Old" is exposed and easily seen.

All other functions on the "new" page have to be deciphered as to where they are.   

  • Upvote 1
  • Love 2
Link to comment
2 hours ago, thebruce0 said:

Yes it's a case of use what you're used to. If you only ever used the new dashboard, its functionality and how you use it are 'normal'.  The additional features and the compact nature of the old do have additional value and usability, but if you've never used them then there's a learning curve, and if someone doesn't have a need to conquer the curve, the favour will always go to what you're used to. This happens everywhere, so it's not surprising that you're more comfortable with the New than the Old, regardless of what the Old has to offer.

 

And that plays well into HQ's possible attitude of "just leave it available as is, relegated to 2nd tier, without being updated, and eventually people will get around to stopping using it" because new users will always be starting with the New dashboard and end up used to it, preferring it.

 

As a web app developer, there are absolutely benefits in either the design or functionality of both dashboard that can and should be merged together. But that's unlikely to ever happen.

I guess I've never seen any real advantage of the old - and I used it a lot since I started here in 2001.  I guess I don't use that many features.  The main reason I use the new is the event calendar.  Some things, like the TB list, I missed for a short while, then realized I never real used it (of course, I use GSAK for all my logging and can pull that info in when I need it).

Link to comment
58 minutes ago, The Jester said:

I guess I've never seen any real advantage of the old - and I used it a lot since I started here in 2001.  I guess I don't use that many features.  The main reason I use the new is the event calendar.

 

That's about the only reason I use the New, and an example of a feature that's been added but not retroactively on the Old. As more and more like that happens, the less 'relevant' the old will be(come) in relation to the New.  It seems to be the way HQ manages a lot of 'new' updated features. Only work on the new and let old stay. Same happened with PQs (though there was no 'new' replacement; the recent Advanced Search feature is the closest 'new' replacement for PQs, which as many are aware doesn't have nearly the same functionality as PQs).   One could say that PQs are still around because they offer unique functionality, and thus the same could be said about the Old Dashboard, with functionality the New doesn't provide. So as long as people use the Old for that purpose, it may remain. Who knows.

 

I don't both much about site navigation since I just have a list of bookmarks for all the pages and functions I use most often; but the old was much more of a hub for navigation than the new. In addition to the old design philosophy compared to the new design philosophy (which can prompt polar opposite opinions).  The New isn't just an upgrade, it's a very different concept on numerous fronts.

Link to comment
On 1/29/2020 at 9:14 AM, thebruce0 said:

Yes it's a case of use what you're used to. If you only ever used the new dashboard, its functionality and how you use it are 'normal'.  The additional features and the compact nature of the old do have additional value and usability, but if you've never used them then there's a learning curve, and if someone doesn't have a need to conquer the curve, the favour will always go to what you're used to. This happens everywhere, so it's not surprising that you're more comfortable with the New than the Old, regardless of what the Old has to offer.

 

And that plays well into HQ's possible attitude of "just leave it available as is, relegated to 2nd tier, without being updated, and eventually people will get around to stopping using it" because new users will always be starting with the New dashboard and end up used to it, preferring it.

 

As a web app developer, there are absolutely benefits in either the design or functionality of both dashboard that can and should be merged together. But that's unlikely to ever happen.

 

Thanks, Bruce. I don't even know how I got on the new dashboard. I became a member 2/2018. Maybe that's why? Anyway, I love it. 

 

 

  • Helpful 1
Link to comment

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...