Skip to content
This repository has been archived by the owner on Nov 21, 2019. It is now read-only.

Unintuitive switching to ETC Node #420

Closed
vojtacerny opened this issue Apr 14, 2017 · 7 comments
Closed

Unintuitive switching to ETC Node #420

vojtacerny opened this issue Apr 14, 2017 · 7 comments

Comments

@vojtacerny
Copy link

When switching to a different node ( e.g. ETH -> ETC) there's no pop-up, UI change or anything that would suggest that process was successful. Can you guys consider coming up with something?

It could help a lot.
Thx.

@tayvano
Copy link
Contributor

tayvano commented Apr 17, 2017

@kvhnuke Please add a success notification upon node switch: "Node successfully switched to [Node name] [Node service]"

If it can't connect to the node, please show error notification instead (same as the header one)

@crptm
Copy link
Contributor

crptm commented Apr 19, 2017

We should also add some visual differentiation bw mainnet nodes and everything else while we are on it.

@tayvano
Copy link
Contributor

tayvano commented Apr 28, 2017

@crptm I don't disagree. Any ideas? I was thinking maybe color coding or something the ETH \ ETC \ TESTETH variable that appears all over the site as it wouldn't be too overbearing.

@crptm
Copy link
Contributor

crptm commented Apr 28, 2017

I am not a designer :D

Was thinking about usual grouped dropdowns like:

Mainnet

MEW
EtherScan

Testnets

Blah
Blah

Custom nodes

Add

@crptm
Copy link
Contributor

crptm commented Apr 28, 2017

Color coding UI is nice also, but it wouldnt work for new users as good as it would for returning ones.

@tayvano
Copy link
Contributor

tayvano commented Apr 28, 2017

Would love feedback on this. I think it may need to be more obvious, but it may be just enough to give you that extra "hey wait why is there a yellow border......". Except for poor color blind people. I'll have to double-check colors and see.

Maybe change the color of the "make transaction" button?

screen shot 2017-04-28 at 5 03 36 am
screen shot 2017-04-28 at 5 03 44 am
screen shot 2017-04-28 at 5 03 52 am
screen shot 2017-04-28 at 5 04 01 am
screen shot 2017-04-28 at 5 04 07 am
screen shot 2017-04-28 at 5 04 13 am

meh, I don't know. I don't expect people to understand the correlation, I just want people to take the extra 200ms to pause before sending something they don't usually send / want to send.....

@tayvano tayvano added this to the v3.6.6 milestone Apr 28, 2017
@tayvano
Copy link
Contributor

tayvano commented May 7, 2017

Calling this done. If anyone has any feedback or thinks it needs to be even more obvious, let me know.

Sign up for free to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in.
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

4 participants