Here's one of many overviews of Flickr's redesign:
http://www.pocket-lint.com/news/121165-old-flickr-vs-new-flickr-what-s-new
Next time you feel that Wikimedia's community is particularly change averse, take a spin through the comments here. :-)
http://www.flickr.com/help/forum/en-us/72157633547442506/
-- Erik Möller VP of Engineering and Product Development, Wikimedia Foundation
Interesting and very familiar. Have there ever been any studies on why people seem to hate change so much?
On Tue, May 21, 2013 at 10:40 AM, Erik Moeller erik@wikimedia.org wrote:
Here's one of many overviews of Flickr's redesign:
http://www.pocket-lint.com/news/121165-old-flickr-vs-new-flickr-what-s-new
Next time you feel that Wikimedia's community is particularly change averse, take a spin through the comments here. :-)
http://www.flickr.com/help/forum/en-us/72157633547442506/
-- Erik Möller VP of Engineering and Product Development, Wikimedia Foundation
Design mailing list Design@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/design
Related to this, there is an interesting talk from the Google designers about their latest redesigns and the initial reactions they got: http://vimeo.com/29965463
On Tuesday, May 21, 2013, Jon Robson jrobson@wikimedia.org wrote:
Interesting and very familiar. Have there ever been any studies on why people seem to hate change so
much?
On Tue, May 21, 2013 at 10:40 AM, Erik Moeller erik@wikimedia.org wrote:
Here's one of many overviews of Flickr's redesign:
http://www.pocket-lint.com/news/121165-old-flickr-vs-new-flickr-what-s-new
Next time you feel that Wikimedia's community is particularly change averse, take a spin through the comments here. :-)
http://www.flickr.com/help/forum/en-us/72157633547442506/
-- Erik Möller VP of Engineering and Product Development, Wikimedia Foundation
Design mailing list Design@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/design
Design mailing list Design@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/design
Erik Moeller, 21/05/2013 19:40:
Here's one of many overviews of Flickr's redesign:
http://www.pocket-lint.com/news/121165-old-flickr-vs-new-flickr-what-s-new
Next time you feel that Wikimedia's community is particularly change averse, take a spin through the comments here. :-)
AFAICS, they also: 1) collapsed the button that allows you to set the license of an image of yours, which is now hidden below a "more" link in the metadata section that was moved outside the screen (or did this happen before? certainly after 2010) ; 2) removed any UI path to the advanced search and to the search for free/CC images, so that now you can find them only on the advanced search, by knowing its URL: http://www.flickr.com/search/advanced/ ; 3) less importantly, hid under that mysterious triple-ball "ellipsis" button the option to find high resolution versions of the image, consistent with a similar regression in the interface of Google Plus compared to PicasaWeb. I found also some bugs, at least for Linux, which make (2) worse.
So, what's the future of CC on Flickr? http://www.flickr.com/creativecommons/ shows only 260M CC images: there were already 220M in 2011 if I read news correctly; only 60M are free. 75 % of the times I ask a user to put an image under cc-by-sa they choose -nc-nd because "it was the first option" (and some of course "what, isn't Wikipedia non-commercial?!). Is this the price to pay to Instagram, Tumblr and Facebook? Will the unusable&pretty-fication help bring more people to an environment where they may meet free knowledge, or will free knowledge just be sacrificed? It's unclear to me what's going on.
Nemo
Yes, it looks like Flickr went too far with this update, judging from the community uproar -- and my own impressions.
They seem to be targeting consumers over 'prosumers' -- and are leaving long-time 'Pro' users like me in the dust.
(I have over 20k images on Flickr: http://www.flickr.com/photos/fabola/ ).
I personally don't mind the new photo-centric UI, which has some real benefits, but I miss some key features like the set overview page, which gave us plenty of room to feature a text description (I used it all the time to write a short report on that set's content -- and to link to other sets or related pages). And I too hate that people can no longer download my photos at any size they want, as Nemo points out below.
That's disappointing, as features like these were an important reason for sticking with Flickr as a publishing tool. Now that it's more like Facebook or Instagram, I have less of an incentive to use it for casual photo-sharing. The main thing that's keeping me there now is the ability to upload images at a high resolution, its suite of organizing tools -- and the fact that so much of my work is already on Flickr.
Once we modernize our multimedia platform and features, we can provide a viable alternative to folks like me, who want more than just a simple photo sharing site -- and want to contribute to our cause.
To be continued,
Fabrice
On May 23, 2013, at 8:20 AM, Federico Leva (Nemo) wrote:
Erik Moeller, 21/05/2013 19:40:
Here's one of many overviews of Flickr's redesign:
http://www.pocket-lint.com/news/121165-old-flickr-vs-new-flickr-what-s-new
Next time you feel that Wikimedia's community is particularly change averse, take a spin through the comments here. :-)
AFAICS, they also:
- collapsed the button that allows you to set the license of an image of yours, which is now hidden below a "more" link in the metadata section that was moved outside the screen (or did this happen before? certainly after 2010) ;
- removed any UI path to the advanced search and to the search for free/CC images, so that now you can find them only on the advanced search, by knowing its URL: http://www.flickr.com/search/advanced/ ;
- less importantly, hid under that mysterious triple-ball "ellipsis" button the option to find high resolution versions of the image, consistent with a similar regression in the interface of Google Plus compared to PicasaWeb.
I found also some bugs, at least for Linux, which make (2) worse.
So, what's the future of CC on Flickr? http://www.flickr.com/creativecommons/ shows only 260M CC images: there were already 220M in 2011 if I read news correctly; only 60M are free. 75 % of the times I ask a user to put an image under cc-by-sa they choose -nc-nd because "it was the first option" (and some of course "what, isn't Wikipedia non-commercial?!). Is this the price to pay to Instagram, Tumblr and Facebook? Will the unusable&pretty-fication help bring more people to an environment where they may meet free knowledge, or will free knowledge just be sacrificed? It's unclear to me what's going on.
Nemo
Design mailing list Design@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/design
_______________________________
Fabrice Florin Product Manager, Editor Engagement Wikimedia Foundation
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Fabrice_Florin_(WMF)
Donate to keep Wikipedia free: https://donate.wikimedia.org/
Le 2013-05-23 18:13, Fabrice Florin a écrit :
Yes, it looks like Flickr went too far with this update, judging from the community uproar -- and my own impressions.
They seem to be targeting consumers over 'prosumers' -- and are leaving long-time 'Pro' users like me in the dust.
Probably we may say that both profiles exists. And I don't mean that one person equals one profile, sometime you just to sit down and watch, and sometime you want to feel more actively involved. So maybe it may be interesting to think about two interfaces for this two use case. Of course, at least to my mind, our wiki movement is about promoting proactivity, and so an interface which induce such a behaviour must IMHO stay our primary goal. We may also let other projects/websites create more passive interfaces reusing commons, thus said making it within Wikimedia would allow us to design it as "first step to a more proactive behaviour".
Now that may all be just a bad idea based on good intents. Zhat do you think? Do you know real experiment feedbacks on this topic?
(I have over 20k images on Flickr: http://www.flickr.com/photos/fabola/ [3] ).
I personally don't mind the new photo-centric UI, which has some real benefits, but I miss some key features like the set overview page, which gave us plenty of room to feature a text description (I used it all the time to write a short report on that set's content -- and to link to other sets or related pages). And I too hate that people can no longer download my photos at any size they want, as Nemo points out below.
That's disappointing, as features like these were an important reason for sticking with Flickr as a publishing tool. Now that it's more like Facebook or Instagram, I have less of an incentive to use it for casual photo-sharing. The main thing that's keeping me there now is the ability to upload images at a high resolution, its suite of organizing tools -- and the fact that so much of my work is already on Flickr.
Once we modernize our multimedia platform and features, we can provide a viable alternative to folks like me, who want more than just a simple photo sharing site -- and want to contribute to our cause.
To be continued,
Fabrice
On May 23, 2013, at 8:20 AM, Federico Leva (Nemo) wrote:
Erik Moeller, 21/05/2013 19:40:
Here's one of many overviews of Flickr's redesign:
Fabrice Florin
Product Manager, Editor Engagement Wikimedia Foundation
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Fabrice_Florin_(WMF) [4]
Donate to keep Wikipedia free:
https://donate.wikimedia.org/ [5]
Links:
[1] http://www.flickr.com/search/advanced/ [2] http://www.flickr.com/creativecommons/ [3] http://www.flickr.com/photos/fabola/ [4] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Fabrice_Florin_(WMF) [5] https://donate.wikimedia.org/
Design mailing list Design@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/design
On Thu, May 23, 2013 at 8:20 AM, Federico Leva (Nemo) nemowiki@gmail.comwrote:
- removed any UI path to the advanced search and to the search for
free/CC images, so that now you can find them only on the advanced search, by knowing its URL: http://www.flickr.com/search/**advanced/http://www.flickr.com/search/advanced/;
That's not true. Advanced search is still available just below the search box, every time you make a search. Cf. http://www.flickr.com/search/?q=dogs
They're probably doing this because they assume that you probably only need advanced search if you didn't find what you wanted on regular search. Seems like a pretty safe assumption from a UX perspetive. Obviously that doesn't account for the use case of Commons people hunting for photos, but that's hardly the majority of their users.
Steven Walling, 23/05/2013 19:48:
On Thu, May 23, 2013 at 8:20 AM, Federico Leva (Nemo) <nemowiki@gmail.com mailto:nemowiki@gmail.com> wrote:
2) removed any UI path to the advanced search and to the search for free/CC images, so that now you can find them only on the advanced search, by knowing its URL: http://www.flickr.com/search/__advanced/ <http://www.flickr.com/search/advanced/> ;That's not true. Advanced search is still available just below the search box, every time you make a search. Cf. http://www.flickr.com/search/?q=dogs
True. It wasn't there when I wrote my message (I found out reading some questions on flickr groups), it seems they also fixed some other bugs. I'm glad that wasn't a design decision.
They're probably doing this because they assume that you probably only need advanced search if you didn't find what you wanted on regular search. Seems like a pretty safe assumption from a UX perspetive. Obviously that doesn't account for the use case of Commons people hunting for photos, but that's hardly the majority of their users.
The flickr user I mentioned above was surely not a Wikimedia Commons user. :)
Nemo
Erik Moeller, 21/05/2013 19:40:
Next time you feel that Wikimedia's community is particularly change averse, take a spin through the comments here. :-)
38,000 comments and counting. :) Here Flickr summarised what they took from it: http://www.flickr.com/help/forum/en-us/72157633771838324/ [1].
As a follow-up to my question on how visible Creative Commons works are now[2], it's interesting to note that flickr.com/creativecommons/ is not even in flickr.com/explore while flickr.com/commons/ is even in home, with one random image from the institutional partners shown to every visitor. In comparison, content on Commons from our partnerships probably has very little visibility unless used in Wikimedia projects. Though again we can't know, for lack of stats. On the other hand, it may make sense that Flickr doesn't give an equal visibility to CC works because they're perceived as being of lower quality on average...
Nemo
[1] For instance, the new Flickr is surely slower: "the site faster, and at the very least as fast as it was before 5/20" reminded me of "[RFC] performance standards for new mediawiki features" http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.science.linguistics.wikipedia.technical/68562/ [2] Someone else noted too: https://encrypted.google.com/search?q="creative+commons"+site%3Ahttp%3A%2F%2Fwww.flickr.com%2Fhelp%2Fforum%2Fen-us%2F72157633531678083%2F And the advanced search is broken again for me, as for this user: http://www.flickr.com/help/forum/en-us/72157633770497507/page2/#reply72157633839533129