I posted some reactions to the version 9028 layout in another thread (that thread dealt with a bug in version 8), but I think that these thoughts are probably better suited to their own thread, so I'm posting it here.
Regarding the layout/workflow in 9028, I understand that a "cleaner" approach is being attempted, but the end result has become much more complex to actually use because it takes so many more button clicks to change or even view the various settings. The audio setting on a BD Copy, for example, shows "EN, EN, EN, EN" for the audio of the selected title. By clicking this spot it then shows "English AC-3/5.1." By dropping down the arrow it finally shows me the specific information for all the tracks that are available, and which are actually checked. Note that the "Summary" page to the right requires me to click the "Details" dropdown first, and then shows me only a partial list of audio tracks followed by "...." This makes the summary a bit useless since it's not complete, and even if it WAS complete, it's complicated to have to CHECK the settings in one spot and CHANGE them in another. Compare this to version 8, where the exact same place you check settings is used to change them as well. It may "look" less clean, but it's ACTUALLY more streamlined and easier to use.
The bottom line is that unlike version 8, where ALL of the information of a given category is easily viewable on one page without requiring ANY clicks (and can be edited on this same page), version 9 requires numerous clicks to do the same actions, and often necessitates clicking the same dropdown arrows multiple times in order to re-confirm the settings that aren't always visible. I constantly find myself asking "did I check the correct audio tracks?," and dropping down the same arrow several times simply because it isn't readily viewable. I understand that version 8 may not look as clean because it shows a lot more information on a given page (although I never heard any complaints about this), but it's simply MUCH easier to use because it offers highly visible information that's easily edited and even easier to check. "Looking" simpler and actually BEING simpler do not always go together -- a "simpler" interface can sometimes make a workflow more complex and tedious.
I've used numerous programs in this arena (i.e. programs like encoders that require a multitude of settings to be checked and edited), and my honest reaction to version 9 in it's current implementation is that it's not very easy to use, and will likely confuse new users.
Larry
Regarding the layout/workflow in 9028, I understand that a "cleaner" approach is being attempted, but the end result has become much more complex to actually use because it takes so many more button clicks to change or even view the various settings. The audio setting on a BD Copy, for example, shows "EN, EN, EN, EN" for the audio of the selected title. By clicking this spot it then shows "English AC-3/5.1." By dropping down the arrow it finally shows me the specific information for all the tracks that are available, and which are actually checked. Note that the "Summary" page to the right requires me to click the "Details" dropdown first, and then shows me only a partial list of audio tracks followed by "...." This makes the summary a bit useless since it's not complete, and even if it WAS complete, it's complicated to have to CHECK the settings in one spot and CHANGE them in another. Compare this to version 8, where the exact same place you check settings is used to change them as well. It may "look" less clean, but it's ACTUALLY more streamlined and easier to use.
The bottom line is that unlike version 8, where ALL of the information of a given category is easily viewable on one page without requiring ANY clicks (and can be edited on this same page), version 9 requires numerous clicks to do the same actions, and often necessitates clicking the same dropdown arrows multiple times in order to re-confirm the settings that aren't always visible. I constantly find myself asking "did I check the correct audio tracks?," and dropping down the same arrow several times simply because it isn't readily viewable. I understand that version 8 may not look as clean because it shows a lot more information on a given page (although I never heard any complaints about this), but it's simply MUCH easier to use because it offers highly visible information that's easily edited and even easier to check. "Looking" simpler and actually BEING simpler do not always go together -- a "simpler" interface can sometimes make a workflow more complex and tedious.
I've used numerous programs in this arena (i.e. programs like encoders that require a multitude of settings to be checked and edited), and my honest reaction to version 9 in it's current implementation is that it's not very easy to use, and will likely confuse new users.
Larry