Nathan Freeman and Mary Beth Raven on "Hannover" UI elements

April 24 2006

Leave it to Nathan to stir things up. :-)

After "Hannover" UI guru Mary Beth Raven's first blog posting, Nathan Freeman opined:

Lotus, please don't lose the plot on this.  You need RADICAL simplification.  And because you can't start stripping features, you need to do the next best thing -- let me as a user or me as an administrator decide what's important for MY ENVIRONMENT.  No two Domino implementations are alike.  Stop browbeating your users with all the incredible things they could be doing, and just let them get on with what they are doing.  You have a great opportunity to leave the competition in the dust here.  You've avoided big moves for long enough -- throw out the baby, the bathwater and the whole darned tub!
To which Mary Beth replied:
If I may summarize, he doesn't want to have to answer questions about each little menu item. He just wants complete control over all menu items. And preferences. I can understand that, and given Lotus Notes' role as an integration platform, it is a reasonable request.

So, we hear ya.
and then goes on to ask some specific questions about possible scenarios or implementations.

These postings are exactly why I wanted the Notes "Hannover" team blogging -- broaden the discussion about what's being planned, and remove some of the mystery in the process.    Some great comments and additional discussion have ensued.  "Hannover" will be a better product for all this outside input....though I don't envy Mary Beth and the team for having to sort through inputs from 15 years of feature requests, usability lab testing, focus groups, software design reviews, product managers, and even the occasional opinionated worldwide sales leader.  I know we've got the best and the brightest working on "Hannover" -- and we'll see more of their work in the coming weeks.

Ed Brill | Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia Category:  Lotus  Blogging  Add/View Comments [21]

Post a Comment

  1. 1  Axel  | 4/24/2006 3:34:03 AM

    "Complete control" through what? Checkboxes?

    That would be a long list. And for my taste there should be code to check at least the validity of the choices. Who is guilty if an admin choose a combination of menu items which are inconsistent for a certain use case? Lotus Notes. And this consistency isn't trivial to test.

    And what if there should be functionality a.d.d.e.d. to the menu to get a quick view on certain things in SAP for the people with Sales role?

    I am biased, but using what I consider snotty and dismissive language ("code jockey") doesn't help to rationalize the debate.

    Also for my feeling this term doesn't fit very well with someone who manages eclipse plug-in infrastructure.

    With the successfull, OSGi based plug-in framework of eclipse a "code jockey" can not only remove functionality but also add functionality.

    This converts the notes client in a composite client for role- or company-specific functionality, which might talk with whatever server-infrastructure.

    And this custom tailoring will make user<->gui interaction easier.

    Don't know how it is implemented in Hannover, but I can assure you that customizing menu in an Eclipse RCP is straight forward.

  1. 2  Nathan T. Freeman  | 4/24/2006 3:50:33 AM

    Axel, if the implementation is anything other than the kind of checkbox/drop-down that we have for policy controls in Domino today, then it will be inadequate for the goal that I'm proposing.

    And I think you can chalk up thinking "code jockey" is dismissive to language differences. There is no malice in my use of that term whatsoever. I *am* a code jockey.

    All this talk of what the Eclipse RCP framework will provide is well and good. But what matters is the implementation, not the possibilities. Notes is effectively licensed open source now. We can rewrite stuff like the mail client. (I have some familiarity with this process.) But it's so much better to have IBM ship a product that doesn't need rewriting. As much as I love what the community has accomplished with OpenNTF, it's not sufficient to ensure the market success of Notes. IBM has to address the concerns of its user base -- I can't imagine a strong enough open source movement for the platform to replace what IBM does with it.

  1. 3  Josef Prusa  | 4/24/2006 6:32:23 AM

    "Notes is effectively licensed open source now."

    Could someone please post a link to any official statement from IBM? I would like to know how exactly is this released and what license is it under.

    There have been rumors circulating around lately but no official press release. Or maybe I just might have missed it...

    Thanks

  1. 4  Axel  | 4/24/2006 6:38:24 AM

    I could easily stiffen on a position and I don't want that no more.

    Just 1 thing: I recommend anybody interested to actually try out one of the short tutorials about building an Eclipse plug-in. I was surprised about how simple it is.

  1. 5  Richard Schwartz http://www.rhs.com/poweroftheschwartz | 4/24/2006 8:54:54 AM

    @3 Josef: What Nathan is referring to is (I believe) the combination of the fact that the mail template has always been provided by IBM, and the fact that Hannover will run within the Eclipse framework. Thus, large portions of the user interface functionality of Hannover will be potentially customizable at the source code level -- but the core Notes API functionality that actually makes it all work is certainly not open source and I would never expect it to be.

  1. 6  Josef Prusa  | 4/24/2006 10:18:00 AM

    @5 Richard - thanks, thought so.

  1. 7  MarvinK  | 4/24/2006 2:35:23 PM

    While I can see why some "code jockeys" might feel threatened by the idea of users being somewhat independent, I think it is an important transition IBM needs to make.

    If you look at the Microsoft clients, you can pretty much do what you want with the menu system--heck, you can probably even get your grandmother to do it! It's that easy.

    There is a difference between easy enough for grandmothers to do without referring to the help and easy enough for a technical person to customize quickly after reading a short tutorial.

  1. 8  Carlos Hernandez  | 4/24/2006 2:40:36 PM

    I always wonder why or whom is IBM developing the version for. Base on the information currently available for the “Hannover” build many features that corporate might want are already part of the latest version. Clients want a client that is light, easy to use and get people talking about Notes again. Note is getting boring and developing another heavy client is not the answer. Microsoft is taking users away from Domino\Lotus Notes even when Microsoft roadmap for Exchange and Outlook are cloudy. IBM need to open Notes more to the open source community, I mean look at the enhancements that has been to the mail template on { Link } . Making a new UI and adding some cute colors is not going to help.

  1. 9  Tom Nichols  | 4/24/2006 4:00:36 PM

    Wow, well said Nathan. That is so true.

    I once went to a bar here in Atlanta that boasted over 200 brands of beer and over 80 on tap. We sat down and I showed him the rows of coolers they keep the bottles in. He looked at it all and turned and said, there are too many choices here. I don't know if I can deal with this. He actually didn't like the place! I think what Nathan is talking about is the same principle.

    Admins should be able to pick what applies to their environment and drop the rest from the GUI. Maybe not on an item by item basis, but through chunks of features grouped logically. Jess (I think) mentioned the WinZip advanced and Winzip basic or whatever- that's a good example.

    Tom

  1. 10  MarvinK  | 4/24/2006 4:57:52 PM

    @8 New pleasing UI with inviting colors will actually help a lot. So many people are horrified the first time they open Lotus Notes (is it a Win 3.x program--or just a clunky java program gone wrong!?), they've already formulated an opinion before even using it.

    Will a pleasing interface eliminate the need for making it more user friendly? No. But it will at least help people keep an open mind to find out if the program is user friendly, before jumping to conclusions.

  1. 11  Axel  | 4/24/2006 10:09:53 PM

    Marvin,

    I am an old fashioned guy who believes in stuff like:

    Take at least one look at things before critizicing them.

    Have you ever seen a presentation of the Hannover client?

    In case that not and if you are interested,here is a power point presentation: click on presentation file on this site:

    { Link }

  1. 12  Sean Burgess http://www.phigsaidwhat.com/ | 4/24/2006 11:09:06 PM

    What I think Axel seems to miss, as usual, is that the answer to all of our problems is not learning how to program in Java and the Eclipse framework. Although I know that Notes will never be an iPod in the simplicity of its interface, I do think allowing the administrators and developers to more effectively control the end user experience can do nothing but help Notes' reputation. Most users never do anything beyond using the buttons provided by the application developers and the smarticons. Sure, there are the power users out there that might create their own agents, but they are almost as scarce as notes professionals at a company.

    However, I do think that there is something wrong about the way profiles are currently administrated. I wish it were more like the way you can set Notes.ini settings in the configuration document or the way you can have a default configuration for servers that don't have their own configuration document. Creating small documents that have a single setting and assigning them to policies makes much more sense to me. As an administrator, there are a large number of settings that will be the same across all policies. This method would also allow admins to create many more group specific policies.

    The more control we can put in the hands of the people who know what Notes can actually do, the easier it will be for those who don't to learn how powerful an application it can be. Once a user needs to do more than just the beginner stuff, an admin can change their policy and give them some more functionality.

    Sean---

  1. 13  Axel  | 4/24/2006 11:56:13 PM

    Dear Sean,

    I know its way more fun to critizice things but to support them. When I am defending Eclipse RCP as a promising client platform, that does not mean that I believe "learning Java or Eclipse framework to be the answer to all questions".

    There is a difference between finding a platform viable and declaring it the solution to all problems.

    Actually I work with different platforms anyway. "Notes Classic" is one of them.

    Please stop personal attack. It does not help much.

    Axel

  1. 14  Axel  | 4/25/2006 12:24:05 AM

    I find your proposal interesting and I hope for the greater good that you discuss that with Mary Beth Raven on her blog.

  1. 15  Ed Brill www.edbrill.com | 4/25/2006 7:04:48 AM

    "Please stop personal attack. It does not help much. "

    Axel, I sent you an e-mail last week with no response. Please check your mail.

  1. 16  David Bell  | 4/25/2006 12:05:01 PM

    @12

    "Once a user needs to do more than just the beginner stuff, an admin can change their policy and give them some more functionality."

    This will be a huge admin burden once users realize their setups can be tailored in this fashion. In the worst case, there would be a policy per user. Not to mention dealing with client upgrades and new features.

    I was looking at the menu structures in Notes after reading the blog entry, and save for actions and some work to better categorize the right-click menus, I doubt there are very many options worth removing compared to the admin pain of managing who sees what.

    Quote selection was picked on, I have used it seldom, mostly because of reply with internet style. Looking at the others though, I don't see much to pare down.

  1. 17  Henning Heinz  | 4/25/2006 12:23:19 PM

    I like the idea of complete control over all menu items and and preferences. However as there will also be a classic Notes client not using the Eclipse Framework I am not sure if this is not a better option for a later release?

    In the first step I would concentrate on getting everything (most) that Notes can do today run on the Eclipse platform and do the major enhancements later.

    More features take more time to develop and for me the biggest problem with Hannover is that I cannot use it today.

  1. 18  Ed Brill www.edbrill.com | 4/25/2006 3:41:21 PM

    "In the first step I would concentrate on getting everything (most) that Notes can do today run on the Eclipse platform and do the major enhancements later"

    I think you might misunderstand the technical design here. In fact even Notes 7 can run on the Eclipse platform -- though the Notes code must be co-resident on the machine with the IBM Workplace Managed client. "Hannover" is not some kind of rewrite -- it is the next version of today's Notes code. So the effort starts from where Notes is today, even in/for the Eclipse framework.

    "Hannover" is a feature release and has been designed as such from the start.

  1. 19  Darryl Miles  | 4/25/2006 7:00:29 PM

    I found this very true. See { Link }

    Too many choices can actually turn you off a product/store etc.

    Darryl

  1. 20  Henning Heinz  | 4/26/2006 4:43:32 AM

    Maybe I misunderstand the technical design but and I have not seen much about the way you design applications in Hannover but indeed I assumed that it is difficult to develop a new environment for "composite applications that draw on both Domino and non-Domino data and application logic" (shameless plug from Forrester) and providing complete control on the menus at the same time.

    From what I have already seen about Hannover I would never say that it is not a feature release. I agree that my comment is misleading in some way. I am all but positive about Hannover.

  1. 21  Axel  | 4/26/2006 8:32:50 AM

    I had that idea at another point and I think the message about Hannover should be made very clear.

    Maybe drawing an analogy from platforms in automobile industry.

    Example: 4 models from Volkswagen use the same carriage, same gearbox, etc. Model Golf is newly released. It gets a new motor.

    The rest remains the same. The completly new motor must communicate in exactly the same way with its environment (gearbox, carriage, etc) as the motor which it replaced.

    Same with Eclipse RCP engine inside Domino. It should communicate exactly the same way with Server, provide same logical programming model for developers or administrators, etc as the "UI engine" which it replaced*.

    I believe that all this stuff might easily be misunderstood or misinterpreted.

    To build composite applications is a next step which goes beyond (different story).

    * of course there never were a physical UI engine in Domino. Maybe we could call it a logical entity :-) -> all the stuff which were replaced by eclipse RCP