Minimalistic interface

[anto]

Given that Studio panels often fail (at least in MacOS), sometimes don't work properly, and take up a lot of space, is it possible to make a minimalist interface without panels? That is, Studios panels should be made as buttons on the sides, as in iPad or Indesign. Then the problem of correcting the panels every time, because several panels are incompatible when together, will be eliminated.

There is no need to keep all panels open on Desktop version. If necessary, you could simply press the button on the side and the panel would open.

 

 

[fde101]

A number of users have requested the option of collapsing panels into icons like that, so that piece of this is essentially a duplicate request.

 

As to the concept of the concept of eliminating the panels, that is inconsistent with a professional workflow.  Studio panels are designed to stay accessible by default to provide immediate access to their content.  I don't want to have to click icons on the sides of the screen every time I switch from a color to a text style - both should be in front of me and immediately available without the extra clicks, menu diving, switching tabs, etc.

Granted that there are too many studio panels to keep ALL of them accessible at ALL times - but the idea is that we can set them up and switch them around to match them to the task at hand, laying out the screen to match a workflow in which we are actively involved.

This is not possible with the iPad interface and is one of its limitations as compared to the desktop version at this time.  With the desktop version we can use large, high-resolution displays to organize the panels for increased efficiency of the task we are performing.

 

Note however that even now if you have several panels stacked on top of each other within a set, you can collapse a set of them by clicking on the tab to collapse them down to the tabs.

[Pšenda]

1 hour ago, fde101 said:

but the idea is that we can set them up and switch them around to match them to the task at hand, laying out the screen to match a workflow in which we are actively involved.

This concept also corresponds to the division of functions into Personas, where the work environment, including Studio panels and tools, can be configured accordingly.

[anto]

1 годину тому fde101 сказав:

I don't want to have to click icons on the sides of the screen every time I switch from a color to a text style - both should be in front of me and immediately available without the extra clicks, menu diving, switching tabs, etc.

You can open as many of them as you need at the same time by simply clicking the appropriate buttons.

 

1 годину тому fde101 сказав:

Granted that there are too many studio panels to keep ALL of them accessible at ALL times - but the idea is that we can set them up and switch them around to match them to the task at hand, laying out the screen to match a workflow in which we are actively involved.

If the panels are detached from the "side places" (left or right), i.e. floating, then when using two monitors, they do not follow the program. If I move the program to another monitor, the panels remain on the previous screen. They are not connected. And you need to manually move each panel.

[fde101]

12 hours ago, anto said:

If the panels are detached from the "side places" (left or right), i.e. floating, then when using two monitors, they do not follow the program

Yes, and this gives you added flexibility.  You can leave them attached (as I generally do) and still be able to place them where you need them within the constraints of attachment, which allows you to move the window of the application around to keep it out of the way of other applications, or you can spread everything out, placing different parts of the same program (or more commonly different documents) on different monitors as appropriate.

[anto]

1 hour ago, fde101 said:

Yes, and this gives you added flexibility.  You can leave them attached (as I generally do) and still be able to place them where you need them within the constraints of attachment, which allows you to move the window of the application around to keep it out of the way of other applications, or you can spread everything out, placing different parts of the same program (or more commonly different documents) on different monitors as appropriate.

For me, this is a limitation. It looks like you've never worked in Indesign, otherwise I can't explain your reluctance to have a much more flexible interface.

 

Publisher's interface reminds me of the clunky interface of Quark Xpress when I was still working with it in 2007. Scribus has the same clunky and inflexible interface.

[deeds]

How can Ableton Live and Blender use two different methods of drawing interfaces from two utterly different commercial paradigms, on all major platforms, and get it all right, make it tight and spritely, and fully scaleable and theme-able?

 

 

[fde101]

6 hours ago, anto said:

It looks like you've never worked in Indesign

I made the mistake of buying a license for Master Collection CS6 not long before they discontinued their product line (by going subscription-only).  I had started learning to work with it but stopped all efforts to do so at that point since the suite clearly had no useful future.

The behaviors you are showing are largely the same as the Affinity suite other than being able to collapse the panels into icons, which gives one additional bit of flexibility in that you can collapse them to save space, but otherwise removes flexibility in that you can't keep multiple collapsed-to-icon panels open at once from the same row of panels (since when you click one to expand it the others collapse) which reduces its utility.

I am not opposed to adding the option of collapsing to icons (don't really care if that ever gets implemented or not, but certainly would not mind the option as long as it is an option), but the original request as stated was to have a design without panels, which is another matter entirely.

If this boils down to just a request to add the feature to collapse to icons, then it is a duplicate of many requests which have been made over the past few years and should have been added to the existing ones rather than a new thread created.

[anto]

4 minutes ago, fde101 said:

should have been added to the existing ones rather than a new thread created

It's much longer to search the forum without knowing what someone called this feature than to write a new post.

[anto]

Today I was editing a video in Blender and discovered the Blender interface. Very flexible. It's cool. I wish Affinity had such a flexible interface.