Slashdot Log In
iGoogle Users Irate About Portal's Changes
Posted by
kdawson
on Sun Oct 19, 2008 02:29 PM
from the without-the-option dept.
from the without-the-option dept.
bhhenry sends in an InformationWeek report on a recent unannounced change in the iGoogle portal. Quoting: "Google insists that its revised iGoogle personalized home page generates better 'happiness metrics' than the old design, but a vocal group of users isn't happy about the changes." The recent change introduces what Google refers to as "canvas view," which the Official Google Blog claims "... makes iGoogle a more useful homepage and a better platform for developers." Unlike the last major change made to Gmail, there is no option to revert to the old version of iGoogle. iGoogle users are reporting that widgets and themes are broken, Gmail attachments don't work, and valuable screen space is wasted. The Personalizing Google section of Google Groups is full of thousands of complaints about this sudden and unannounced change. Many posters have have stated that they are using the Canadian or UK version of iGoogle or even moving to NetVibes.com to get their preferred layout back. It seems that Google and Yahoo are moving in lockstep in springing forced changes that users hate.
Related Stories
[+]
Yahoo Changes User Profiles, To Massive Outrage 255 comments
Wiseleo writes "Yahoo decided to massively screw up their entire userbase by changing all user profiles to blank. No warning, no automated way to get data back, and other unwanted changes. The blog has such choice quotes as 'We know this has been a rough transition for some of you and, and are committed to helping you use, understand, and (hopefully) enjoy your new profile,' and, 'We also know lots of you worked hard on your old profiles and want your data. If you feel like you're missing data, we've saved a copy of your old profile (and alias) and our Customer Care team can retrieve this information. You won't, however, be able to revert back to your old profile format, but you will be able to get any data that you think is missing. To do this, please go here to contact Customer Care.' There were 850 comments posted, all negative, on the first day. There are hundreds more today. There is even more outrage on the Yahoo Messenger blog."
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
Full
Abbreviated
Hidden
Loading... please wait.
Don't forget Apple (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Don't forget Apple (Score:5, Insightful)
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
At least the new Facebook gave a chance to look at it to see if you liked it. Those who wished could express an opinion on it, which may or may not have gotten attention from developers. But the notice and first look kind of thing is nice to have, even if it will eventually be forced on you.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Don't forget Apple (Score:5, Informative)
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
I might as well point out that I've been on the new iGoogle since very early 2008.
And Google announced, over a year ago, that these changes will be happening. Just because something wasn't reported, doesn't make it fact.
Re:Don't forget Apple (Score:5, Informative)
I'd agree for a lot of things (facebook, flickr), but for google the change really blows. Moving the previously optional tabs from the top to the left creates a huge empty gap on the iGoogle page, reducing the amount of space to work in. The new applications hijack your homepage - I can no longer middle click to open things I want to see later into the background, because they've been AJAX'd (the new hijacked?). Some of the apps I used to use are broken by the change, and I'm not given any option of removing the parts I really don't need.
It used to be that I could aggregate a large amount of relevant information into a small space using iGoogle. Now it's a larger space (due to the extra column of waste) with an interface that's less conducive to picking out those pieces of information I want to expound upon.
I'm sure that I'll eventually get used to it (or move to a different portal), but the change was abrupt and unwelcome, because it broke a fundamental use flow that I'd found quite productive.
Parent
Re:Don't forget Apple (Score:4, Informative)
The new applications hijack your homepage - I can no longer middle click to open things I want to see later into the background, because they've been AJAX'd (the new hijacked?).
When I was a pre-beta tester (or whatever) a couple months ago, I agree, that was broken. Today, using FF 3.0.3 (along with about 15 extension addons) that works along with right clicking. For example I opened this /. story by right click open in new tab off the slashdot rss applet. That did not work a couple months ago. Maybe noscript is saving me or something?
For years I removed or disabled flash to avoid stupid graphic designer mistakes and only recently added flash to watch videos, with the protection of adblock and noscript and friends. Will I now have to find a way to disable ajax to work around stupid designs?
Parent
Re:Don't forget Apple (Score:5, Insightful)
The world is coming to people bitching and moaning whenever any of their precious stability in life is taken away.
I'd agree for a lot of things (facebook, flickr), but for google the change really blows.
It's funny how that works -- while changes don't affect you personally or you don't mind them, the people who are upset are "bitching" and "moaning" about it. Yet, suddenly, when you are ticked off about a change, it's suddenly "abrupt and unwelcome" and you "don't agree" complaining about it is bitching.
I'm not a conservative, but I respect that part of the conservative ideology. Is this thing being changed for a good reason, or is it being changed for the sake of putting up something new? Even if this change doesn't affect me, if people start changing things for the sake of change, maybe the next one will affect me, or the next.
Almost no one is really bitching and moaning about these changes -- they all have legitimate complaints, and so will you when something you like changes. Don't call them names; put yourself in their shoes.
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
In my defense, I have both facebook and flickr pages. The facebook changes were a necessity once it moved from the simple layout to one where content could be added. Prior to those changes, the place was getting so cluttered that it wasn't even worth trying to put a quick message on the wall or e-stalk a person when you needed to get ahold of them.
Google's changes don't come as the result of new features being added that need their own space to grow. Moreover, their previous model of having boxes that can
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
You should use my copy of Firefox: for some reason on my laptop I don't see these changes, but on my desktop I do.
I like the changes. I want to get it consistent. I'm baffled as to why one computer gets the changes while the other with the same browser does not.
Re:Don't forget Apple (Score:4, Informative)
Asynchronous Java and XML - so instead of just having http links that one can click, there are javascript callbacks that retrieve updated page content without reloading the whole page. While this is nice when you only intend to browse within the single page, or when there are small bits of page that can be updated without needing an entirely new page, it breaks functionality in cases where you intend to get completely new pages.
To your sibling (vlm): I mean for things like weather (can no longer middle click as it just brings you back to the ig page), gmail (only one email at a time, no more opening a bunch in tabs), calendar (can't open upcoming appointments with middle click), etc. These used to be standard links, but have been replaced with ajax callbacks that load up the respective iGoogle page.
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
A nit: It turns out you don't know what AJAX is. It's Asynchronous Javascript and XML. Javascript is significantly different than Java.
so instead of just having http links that one can click, there are javascript callbacks that retrieve updated page content without reloading the whole page.
It's actually not all or nothing. Progressive enhancement means that you can treat it as either a hyperlink or a button to trigger JavaScript.
Example: When you reply to my comment, if you've got tabbed browsing turned on, you should be able to middle-click on the "Reply to This" button and open it in a new tab. Or you can simply click on it, and it will expand inside this pa
Re:Don't forget Apple (Score:5, Insightful)
A nit: It turns out you don't know what AJAX is.
He does in the sense that actually matters, as opposed to what the J in AJAX stands for.
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Asynchronous Javascript and XML.
Ba-zing. You sure showed him!
Re:Don't forget Apple (Score:4, Insightful)
To me, the new facebook is better, iGoogle's canvas and tab placement is an improvement, and Flickr is still perfectly suited for posting my photos.
Parent
Re:Don't forget Apple (Score:5, Insightful)
I couldn't agree with you more. I really like the new layout of facebook, the new iGoogle layout, and the new flickr layout. But what am I supposed to do, post in forums for all three sites and talk about why the haters are wrong? Not worth the effort... I'll just keep using these sites and those who can't stand the changes can go elsewhere.
Parent
Don't forget Mechanics. (Score:4, Insightful)
"I'll just keep using these sites and those who can't stand the changes can go elsewhere."
Or start using Greasemonkey.
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Don't forget Apple (Score:4, Insightful)
And why shouldn't they? There's precious little "stability" in our lives at the moment, and most of us really don't need to wake up to a portal page that has been capriciously redesigned.
You are extremely naive, son. The notion that Google "did tests and concluded it would improve the user experience" is belied by the fact that part of the user experience means being comfortable that the layout of the page you view most often is going to look the same tomorrow than it did last night.
Parent
Re:Don't forget Apple (Score:5, Insightful)
Acknowledge, adapt, and move.
Parent
Re:Don't forget Apple (Score:4, Insightful)
The world is coming to people bitching and moaning whenever any of their precious stability in life is taken away. Between the new Facebook, the new Flickr, and now iGoogle, I've seen so many people complaining for no other reason than that it's different.
If you don't like a newer version of a downloaded program, you stick with the old one. If you don't like a newer version of a webpage, then you (usually) have to go out of your way to change it back. Or just switch services.
When /. changed to the D2 system, I just switched it back. Easy peasy. There's an option to do it in the settings. Changing iGoogle back means either changing your locale or setting a javascript var or using a Greasemonkey script. Though fairly easy, it's still a hack.
I'm all for change, but where possible, why not provide the version of the app before the change? Stick a 'This older version of $x is unsupported. Use at your own risk' if you want.
The Ars [arstechnica.com] story about the switch put across the point that the new canvas view makes it a much more attractive proposition for advertising. Sure, there are many other values, but with the amount of people complaining [google.com] (the main issue being the screen-hogging sidebar) if Google doesn't provide a realistic fix for this 'feature', it's just going to look as if they care more about revenue than customers. True or not, it doesn't make Google look as shiny as before.
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
The world is coming to people bitching and moaning whenever any of their precious stability in life is taken away. Between the new Facebook, the new Flickr, and now iGoogle, I've seen so many people complaining for no other reason than that it's different. Call me naive, but I have faith in these companies that they made these changes for a reason, namely that they did tests and concluded it would improve the user experience, and that the bugs will be worked out in time. (And about the FireWire: people were whining when the iMac didn't have a floppy drive too.)
Ditto.
I remember being swamped with invitations to various Facebook groups bemoaning the loss of "Old Facebook", which I remember being a horrible mess. Then again, I log into Facebook only once a week.
As for iGoogle, I don't know what the fuss is all about. Really.
So the tabs have moved to the left. Big fucking deal. I recently did that in Firefox, too; Tree Style Tab is a great extension for surfing on a widescreen.
Oh, yes, the Clock looks a bit less serious, and the Gmail applet has been improved sign
Re:Don't forget Apple (Score:4, Insightful)
As for iGoogle, I don't know what the fuss is all about. Really. So the tabs have moved to the left. Big fucking deal.
Yes, it is a big deal, forcing a change from a 3 column layout to four, with the new column being useless and taking up space that was previously used for other things. It's clearly a downgrade if you like your homepage to work as an at-a-glance page of quick links and info. So now you know.
Parent
Re:Don't forget Apple (Score:5, Funny)
Call me naive, but I have faith in these companies that they made these changes for a reason, namely that they did tests and concluded it would improve the user experience
Two words: New Coke
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Now, if a user wishes to pay a fee and become a customer, then there may be a basis to say that the service is not up
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Majority of people still resistant to change. News at 11!
I quite like it. (Score:5)
I don't really use iGoogle because I found the previous interface clunky - so unless I am not seeing what others are I think I will hence use iGoogle more often...
Re: (Score:2)
e.g. I used to middle-click on all the new e-mails which needed attention into a bunch of tabs, now they just expand the widget into a window in the trimmed down gmail so I need to go one at a time.
Also am I really the only person who only uses 1 tab? E-mail, links, weather, calendar, RSS feeds. Th
Re: (Score:2)
I have two tabs - one for the normal stuff, and then one for my webmasters tools.
I prefer the tabs to the left of the page - they used to be on top - and the new way fits my resolution better (1450x1040) but I can see that the tab bar on the left take up too much real estate on lower-rez screens.
Re: (Score:2)
I agree. While I can understand that some people may dislike it, I think it's a fine and justifiable change.
I also understand why offering a reversion option is not always feasible.
Finally, of course large, unannounced changes will break some widgets. But within a week or two, I'm sure the majority of things will be working again.
In other words: settle down, chill out. Change happens.
i am so angry (Score:2, Funny)
i need something trivial and pointless to bitch about, minor layout changes in websites are infuriating
Re: (Score:2)
Don't go to idle.slashdot.org
Wasted Screen Space (Score:2)
I have to agree about the wasted screen space. Now that they have that bar on the left (with the links to all your pages items), it makes the home page itself quite a bit smaller. And, I don't want to have to click on each one of those items to see them in their full glory. I liked the home page to have quick bits of information and I could deicde what I wanted to read.
Hopefully they will listen and let users revert back.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
"upgrade". Use <a href="http://userstyles.org/styles/11351">
http://userstyles.org/styles/11351</a> for a simple fix of the
horizontal tabs.
People hate change... (Score:5, Informative)
...news at 11.
Welcome to the future of cloud computing. This is what it means to give up control of your software for the convenience of a net-based service.
Excellent Lesson in Net-Based Applications (Score:5, Insightful)
This was exactly my first thought, as well.
If you really like the interface and find, say, Office 97 does everything you need it to do--you can just keep using it.
But if any part of your program (whether it is a word processor, a game, or even an OS) or your data (be it emails or a movie) resides somewhere else, you are not in control and "upgrades" will eventually be forced on you, whether you want them or not.
This is a good "for example" to point out when people talk about the magical wonders of AppleTV or BluRay's online components or what have you. Sadly, this is seen by many companies as a possible alternative to DRM--just forcing everything to have an online component, so your programs (if they reside on your computer at all!) are calling home every five minutes.
Parent
google.com/ig (Score:5, Interesting)
I would be one of those unhappy about the change - tabs migrated from top to the left side (*). It added nothing new to the page while added something (occupying precious screen space) what I do not like.
Overall the change is bad. It is bad mostly because it is not optional. I spent half of an hour to try to put my tabs where they were before, but found no such option.
And since most of the Web sites are still not wide screen compatible, resizing my window wider is really annoying: on other sides I start to see more of the empty side bars. And it's not that on google.com/ig the space is occupied by something I need...
It's not the end of the world, but the change is bad.
(*) Also I think left-handed people would have preferred the tabs on right side of page. But you can't move them, you can't remove them.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
1. Convention for tab metaphor is horizontal arrangement, not vertical. The new layout is counterintuitive.
2. Buttons that appear similar to OS UI 'minimize' and 'maximize' controls should do just that -- open and shut the collapsible frames. Now they open up a list of options, one of which is 'minimize'. That's an extra step just to perform a simple function.
3. Tell people before you make a change like that! I assumed it was something I, the user, did wrong. I spent about an hour trying different th
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Well, actually it did add something: the widgets on each tab can be listed, tree style, by clicking on the "+" next to the tab name, which shows why the tabs were moved to the left.
So, it's not a pointless exercise by any means. As you point out, if you don't have many widgets to manage, then it's a waste of space. The flip side is that the more widgets you have to manage, the better this layout is relative to the old one.
The change was a bit disorienting, for a few seconds at least until I realized that I
the change was announced (Score:5, Interesting)
Google was even asking for beta testers.
I think the new iGoogle has some problems, but it's generally better than the old one. I don't think Google should have switched over yet.
Daily Mash (Score:5, Funny)
I like the new iGoogle (Score:3, Insightful)
Why Gmail Gadget With No Hide Preview? (Score:5, Insightful)
Terrible (Score:5, Insightful)
They have rendered my homepage almost entirely useless in one fell swoop, to the point that I am actively looking for something new (meanwhile I have to use the UK site: www.google.co.uk)
The worst part? They are doing this with developers in mind more than users. Some Google article I was reading discussed advertising and developer freedom instead of user experience, with a couple of vague mentions of "happier users." I don't want to sound like Marx or anything, but this switch was to make the powerful minority happy instead of the masses. I would be pissed if they snuck ads onto my widgets - I already click on plenty of search and text ads!
The ironic thing is this is one of their only truly "beta" products, and it's one of the few not labeled so.
To get your old iGoogle layout back (Score:4, Informative)
Log-in to iGoogle through www.google.co.uk and enjoy...at least until Google forces the new layout on UK users.
The new sidebar, weather gadget, and Gmail preview take up too much space, even on my 24'' monitor.
BREAKING (Score:3, Funny)
People hate change, news at eleven.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:stop whining, it's free (Score:5, Interesting)
It's a free service. You get what you pay for.
It's ad-supported, you are paying for it.
Parent