Bugzilla – Full Text Bug Listing
| Summary: | It's too hard to find the More Packages... link on the main download page | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Product: | Community | Reporter: | Ed Merks <Ed.Merks> | ||||||
| Component: | Website | Assignee: | phoenix.ui <phoenix.ui-inbox> | ||||||
| Status: | RESOLVED FIXED | QA Contact: | |||||||
| Severity: | normal | ||||||||
| Priority: | P3 | CC: | ahunter.eclipse, denis.roy, d_a_carver, ian.skerrett, lucas.bigeardel, nboldt, richard.gronback | ||||||
| Version: | unspecified | ||||||||
| Target Milestone: | --- | ||||||||
| Hardware: | PC | ||||||||
| OS: | Windows XP | ||||||||
| URL: | http://ed-merks.blogspot.com/2008/07/wheres-modeling-package.html | ||||||||
| Whiteboard: | |||||||||
| Attachments: |
|
||||||||
|
Description
Ed Merks
I think the mockup on http://canyouanalysethis.blogspot.com/ is a great suggestion. I've asked him to attached it to this bug. If we get agreement, hopefully we can implement it early next week. (In reply to comment #1) > I think the mockup on http://canyouanalysethis.blogspot.com/ is a great +1 !! Created attachment 106601 [details]
mockup of a better more packages link for ganymede
+1 as a replacement for the current solution... ... though I've already complained in other bugs that we should just list all 7 instead of arbitrarily cutting off the list at 4. If we had 20, I'd say, okay, maybe that's too many for one page. But 4 vs. 7 isn't a huge difference. Of course there's already precedent on other pages to use expand/collapse <div>s to allow people to see more w/o going to another page. If the sections were narrower vertically, there might be room for all 7 in about the same space. Could the "More packages" row be such an expand/collapse <div>, replacing itself w/ the other 3 packages, instead of having to load a new page? I can attach a patch if anyone's keen on this idea. (In reply to comment #4) > ... though I've already complained in other bugs that we should just list all 7 > instead of arbitrarily cutting off the list at 4. If we had 20, I'd say, okay, > maybe that's too many for one page. But 4 vs. 7 isn't a huge difference. Why can't we simply list all 7 for Ganymede? Rest assured that Rich and I intend to take up this issue with the board. Clearly this page is prime real estate and decisions about what is preferentially promoted on this page are not decisions to be taken lightly. We're trying to improve the perception that Eclipse is mostly about being a Java IDE, so having three Java flavors here is doing an exceedingly poor job of representing the diversity of what's available at Eclipse. (In reply to comment #3) > Created an attachment (id=106601) [details] > mockup of a better more packages link for ganymede > Thanks. Could you attach the 'source' image for the icon, in eps/ai format, or in high-res png? (In reply to comment #4) > ... though I've already complained in other bugs that we should just list all 7 > instead of arbitrarily cutting off the list at 4. If we had 20, I'd say, okay, > maybe that's too many for one page. But 4 vs. 7 isn't a huge difference. The difference is that 1) we do plan on having more than 7; for instance we are expecting a PHP package shortly so where do we draw the line? 2) we are trying to make it easy for new users to Eclipse to use our download page. The feedback we have heard is that providing a short list of downloads makes it easier for people to understand how to get started. This strategy appears to be working, since complaints to webmaster about how to get started with Eclipse have significantly been reduced. 3) we also promote our member third party distros on the download page, so if we add more items, the third party distros get pushed further down the page. I appreciate that people would like to add more content to the download page. However, as with everything at Eclipse we need to balance the requirements of different community members. Right now the focus of the download page has been on making it easy for new users to get started with Eclipse. Based on the feedback we get to webmaster@eclipse.org this seems to be working. > I appreciate that people would like to add more content to the download page.
> However, as with everything at Eclipse we need to balance the requirements of
> different community members. Right now the focus of the download page has
> been on making it easy for new users to get started with Eclipse. Based on the
> feedback we get to webmaster@eclipse.org this seems to be working.
Ian, who are the "new users", I would suspect that the majority are still Java or Java EE developers, but as you said, there is a plan for more packages, which means more potential "new users" for those packages. Maybe the page needs to be catagorized a bit more.
Let's use the PHP package as a potential example. IRC gets bombarded with users trying to get PHP to run with eclipse, and don't know where to start. If they go directly to the downloads page and can only see Java packages, they are going to get frustrated.
Which is I think Ed's point about the modeling package. With the popularity ranking hiding the other packages on the More Packages link, it makes it confusing for these "new users" to find the packages they want. I personally would like to see an XML IDE package created as well for the XML User Community, but we need to do something that makes it easy for all new potential users to find the package they are looking for.
Personally, I think too much screen space is used up by the icons. I know it looks pretty, but it takes up a lot of space that could be used to display more packages.
Maybe a categorization of the packages:
Java
Java Developer
Java EE Developer
Java EE with BIRT
Modeling
Modeling
UML Tools
Dynamic Languages (Ruby, PHP, Groovy, etc):
Ruby
PHP
The above is just an idea.
Created attachment 106743 [details]
here is the composite icon
it wasn't done very carefully so if it isn't good enought tell me and I will 'improve it'
regards
garyt
(In reply to comment #9) > > I appreciate that people would like to add more content to the download page. > > However, as with everything at Eclipse we need to balance the requirements of > > different community members. Right now the focus of the download page has > > been on making it easy for new users to get started with Eclipse. Based on the > > feedback we get to webmaster@eclipse.org this seems to be working. > > Ian, who are the "new users", I would suspect that the majority are still Java > or Java EE developers, but as you said, there is a plan for more packages, > which means more potential "new users" for those packages. Maybe the page > needs to be catagorized a bit more. > > Let's use the PHP package as a potential example. IRC gets bombarded with > users trying to get PHP to run with eclipse, and don't know where to start. If > they go directly to the downloads page and can only see Java packages, they are > going to get frustrated. > > Which is I think Ed's point about the modeling package. With the popularity > ranking hiding the other packages on the More Packages link, it makes it > confusing for these "new users" to find the packages they want. I personally > would like to see an XML IDE package created as well for the XML User > Community, but we need to do something that makes it easy for all new potential > users to find the package they are looking for. > > Personally, I think too much screen space is used up by the icons. I know it > looks pretty, but it takes up a lot of space that could be used to display more > packages. > > Maybe a categorization of the packages: > > Java > Java Developer > Java EE Developer > Java EE with BIRT > Modeling > Modeling > UML Tools > Dynamic Languages (Ruby, PHP, Groovy, etc): > Ruby > PHP > > The above is just an idea. > +1 for the idea of area based splitting for packages The original issue is that the "More Packages" link is too hard to find. I believe that statement is based on subjective observations, as I have numbers that prove otherwise. The "More packages" page is the #4 destination on www.eclipse.org... only behind the home page, the main downloads page itself, and the documentation landing page. In 4th position, it is ahead of every other link on the top nav bar except downloads. Please see http://dev.eclipse.org/mhonarc/lists/phoenix-dev/msg01019.html for the details. Furthermore, the More Packages page generates sufficient traffic that an inefficient query is causing noticeable load on our database servers (see bug 242881). I can hardly notice Bugzilla load on our DB servers as a comparison. If the packaging page design needs improvements, please open separate bugs. As it stands, being in 4th position, the link is definitely not too hard to find. It seems to me that https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/attachment.cgi?id=106601&action=edit suggested a significant improvement and effectively you're saying you won't make such changes unless a different bug with that suggestion is opened. That seems a little pedantic to me to focus on the subject line at the exclusion of all else. It also seems to me that the changes being done in https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=242019 are quite relevant here and address directly the issue I've raised. I.e., this page is *much* better in my opinion. http://www.eclipse.org/downlode/ So why return the bug with the "what you say is bogus" message rather than indicating that folks are already working on improvements in a related bug making this one a duplicate. It would certainly give a better message of responsiveness, i.e., it's more positive marketing to indicate what positive steps are being taken. Also, you never did provide the information I asked about in https://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=15140216&postID=8847737400383263157 I'm curious how much less RCP is being downloaded this year compared to last year since that might well be a reflection of 2/3 fewer people are realizing it even exists. Ed, it's unfortunate that you interpret it that way. You beat us up pretty hard with comment 0 and your blog, and especially with comment 6, so I thought it would be good to follow up with some actual numbers and set the record straight -- the link is *not* hard to find. While attachment 106601 [details] is interesting, it's not a 'significant improvement' over something that's already working quite well. There are still issues remaining with the download page: - the modeling, rcp and reporting packages require one more click than the four others - the members downloads require scrolling down, and they would get lower and lower if we'd add more packages - the project downloads are no longer as visible as they were before the packages came to life For these reasons, Nathan has begun work on a redesigned page (bug 242019) that will hopefully serve everyone better. The current design dates back to the single SDK download, with prominent links to source, projects and categories, and no longer works for the amount of links we want to put front-and-center. As for the RCP stats, the numbers are all self-serve for committers. Simply go to the Portal > Project committer > Tools for committers > Download stats I'm very happy with the work Nathan is doing, so if this bug had simply been returned as a duplicate of that, I'd not have said a word. Nor would I have opened this bug in the first place without a concrete suggestion for improvement. Both you and Ian did a +1 on that suggestions, but in the end you revert back to saying it's not a significant improvement and suggest that if we want to make improvements deemed significant we should open a new bug with new/different/better suggestions. But there already is such a bug open and this bug did already contain a good suggestion with +1s. So it's all just a bit of bad marketing and customer relations to be focused primarily on numbers that prove plenty of people are finding it. My blog was all about my disappointment that modeling is so poorly surfaced on the website after all the efforts of many dozens of committers. This was compounded by the fact that any changes whatsoever appeared simply not to be negotiable and that some of the reasons given, things slipping down too low were contradicted by a huge banner that does exactly that, seemed lame and could be addressed with changes. As for the board issue, it's not something to take personally. I know folks are doing what they believe is right based on the direction they've been given. But the fact remains that this is an issue about how the foundation is using valuable shared real estate to generate value for all its members and to help promote the success of all its projects. Ian was clear on the thinking behind the current approach and the fact that it appeared not negotiable makes it necessary to take a step back and consider the direction being given. I understand fully why you would take much of this personally since you all take great pride in your work and so you should So I'm sorry for saying things that were taken personally. It seems to me that the new page Nathan is working on might well make the whole issue moot. Hence a focus on the fact that "we listened and we made changes" would have been the "good marketing and public relations approach" to have emphasized. As for the stats... I often need to explain to Nick, please assume that I'm stupid and that I won't know how to figure it out. :-P I'm still trying to figure out how to make that thing spit out the stats for the RCP package for June-July. I'm bound to figure it out eventually. Thanks, Ed. I agree I could have closed this with a "good marketing and public relations approach" but I sometimes run out of that :) To make it up to you, I ran some download numbers for you. Our download stats only go back one year, so I could only come up with these numbers for August '07 2007-08-02 to 2007-09-02 /technology/epp/downloads/release/20070702/eclipse-rcp-europa-win32.zip 87321 /technology/epp/downloads/release/20070702/eclipse-rcp-europa-linux-gtk.tar.gz 4771 /technology/epp/downloads/release/20070702/eclipse-rcp-europa-macosx-carbon.tar.gz 1587 3 records found. 93679 Thanks Denis! That explains why I couldn't collect the numbers for the range I wanted other than just stupidity. :-P So it's a little bit of an apples and oranges comparison to look at the RCP Ganymede downloads to date verses the month of August for RCP Europa last year but it looks like ~95,000 verses ~15,000 which is either a massive decline in interest in RCP, a significant impact simply from not being prominently visible, or a combination of the two. If anything, you'd expect the initial downloads to be more than the downloads for the slow month of August so likely these numbers under estimate the trend or impact. I really don't have any significant issues left if we move toward the design of the new page Nathan is crafting. It puts all packages on a more equal footing; it seems useful to me to rank then in the order in which they are most likely to be selected (though I know some would prefer alphabetical or something that's not liable to change over time). The tab design also makes the project and distros much more obvious and puts them on a more equal footing as well. Have a great long weekend! I see the main page has improved now as well so effectively this bug is fixed. Thanks to whomever did that!! Changing resolution to fixed, as per comment 18. Everyone loves Nathan! It's true. We should clone him. :-) |