I totally agree that this is an area that could do with substantial improvement. However, please don't put it to a contest/vote — hire a reputable UI/UX designer/firm.

the reason i mentioned the vote / contest is that im nervous that oranged would not recognize good design. thats not mean to be an insult, but i feel like if they can continue making an app for that mac that still looks like this, then they might be slightly out of touch with modern mac ux.

As I understand it studiometry is a cross-platform application written in realbasic — so not all Studiometry users are mac users (like you and I) — though I imagine there are more software options for Windows users, so perhaps there are more mac users proportionally. It could also be a limitation of working with Realbasic — alot of Realbasic applications look pretty much the same (in other words, ugly and outdated — a reviewer described the Realbasic GUI as looking more windows xp than even windows xp does!) — But I'm not a developer so I don't know what's possible.

if thats the case that means we are using 3rd rate software. basically catering the lowest common denominator....

i really believe that we should have great looking software that works in line with the mac hig . . 

Having worked in the past in dual-platform shops (windows and mac — usually designers on mac, writers/admin on windows) I think cross-platform compatibility is a strong selling point. These days I run a small mac-only shop, as I suspect you do — so this is not a selling point to me, whereas a graphically sophisticated and highly functional interface would be.

thanks for the response. the most obvious issue to me is the menu bar... its crazy crowded up there. think of a 13" macbook and how crowded the entire app seems on it.

besides that - if i work in an app all day long, i really need it to pull me in . . not repel me.

i want the app to be sexy and fun to use.....i understand functionality is more important, but it can have both. 

i think that really the app layout and design needs to be redone from scratch with 2011 in mind. its an amazing app, but its been built on over and over again over so many years. sometimes you just need to throw out what you have and start from scratch. obviously the database and all the programming behind the app is excellent, but its just the design that is lacking.

now at the moment, you arent far behind any other similar mac software, but times will change quickly, and someone will make an amazing looking piece of software with a similar functionality set, and will outpace you.

daylite is good looking, but not good looking enough to get me back there. we depend on certain features that SM offers . . 

the calendar is just so ugly . . (im sorry), look at apple's calendars in iOS and Lion . . they look great!

the calendar in SM looks like its from Now Up To Date from the 90's!

hire a real UX designer and let them help you . . because thats an area i really feel that is important. its like being in an ugly office all day, or a happy pleasant good looking office. they both have the same purpose, but one inspires you to move forward, where the other just makes you want to get in and out as quickly as you can.

i would love to see studiometry on this site one day:

http://beautifulpixels.com/

To best honest, everything on that site looks like little toys or simple tools that don't do much. We use Studiometry every day and are quite happy with the interface/look/feel. I find nothing "ugly" about it, even though it's not a plastic/shiny app like those, you can still tell a lot of time has been spent making the program look nice. I'd much rather oranged continue to focus on the quality of the product and features rather than "polishing a turd" as one might say.

the apps might be toys, but the design is incredible. why should good design be ignored in a product we use daily.

its cluttered, and has 90's graphics . . how is that helpful when trying to manage so much information !

im glad you are "happy" with the current design, but it is not intuitive, and plain dated graphically.

if no one agrees, thats fine. just keep in mind that i myself am constantly looking for better offerings in terms of specs, features, and design. we have to renew yearly to stay up to date with the latest versions, and if something better comes along... you might lose some customers.

the idea is to be ahead of the curve and get there before everyone else does. 

if everyone in the world though design was good enough . . we would have some really shitty products out there. 

i use a mac for a reason . . otherwise id have a beige box running xp on it.

I don't think the issue is making Studiometry 'pretty' — I think it's about refining it's interface for functionality and user experience. I also think that as Mosey originally suggested, hiring a professional interface designer — even as a consultant — is the way to go here. An informal survey via the feature requests thread is not going to be nearly as productive and could quickly degenerate into 'I like this/don't like this' and bean-counting.

I'm a web/graphic designer so I can sympathize somewhat with the task at hand — But as Mosey points out it's precisely because Studiometry is a pretty complex application, and because we manage so much information with it, that good UI and workflow design is critical. I work with pretty complex software (such as the adobe suite) everyday and expect the same UI/workflow sophistication exhibited there in other applications I introduce into my daily toolbox.

The beautifulpixels site leaves me cold and I agree that there is a boom in single-task apps that lean more on graphical elements than functionality — However if you look at other apps such as Guided Ways' excellent and sophisticated 2do task app (http://2doapp.com/en/2Do/features.html), the mac-friendly interface of Jumsoft's Money (http://www.jumsoft.com/money/) or even Panic's one-window development app for mac, Coda (http://www.panic.com/coda) you will get some sense of Mac-user's expectations, and best practices (2do in particular) in UI design. And Coda — the most expensive of those apps — is half the price of Studiometry, so surely we don't have to sacrifice form for function in the name of development focus?

If I had to choose an area where the relationship between form and function could be improved, I would probably turn my attention to the Calendar. If this is to be a meaningful tool, calendar items need to display more information and provide more visual cues. I know colouring calendar items is planned, but I'm holding a wait-and-see attitude about it's implementation. Opening a modal box to sniff items doesn't seem to gel well with the 'all-in-one- window strategy — I need a calendar I can scan quickly. A perfect example of where the calendar falls apart for me is that I go through the trouble of converting all of my project specific studiometry to-do items in ical to individual project items in ical so that I can attach alarms and colour-coding to the items. What an incredible waste of time. I find myself not using any of this functionality in favour of other more functional software.

A related area for development would be the 'to do' feature. Whether you're a fan of the GTD method or some other method of task-management — I think apps like the aforementioned 2do app, or Culture Code's Things (http://culturedcode.com/things/) are setting the bar for form and function — at least on the mac.

One last note: As you know cross-platform cloud-hosted management applications are gaining traction — so competition in the PM market is going to be that much more fierce in the future — when I was shopping for software, online applications were the other major contender for my investment — all the more reason to pull ahead of your competitors as Mosey suggests.

Thank you for your consideration,

Michael

By the way, it just occurred to me — the argument for a ux professional is staring us in the face — ZenDesk — you can crib from their job hunt for a UI/UX Design Lead for your own job call :)

http://www.find-designer-jobs.com/zendesk-uiux-design-lead/

"We are currently looking for a passionate, talented and experienced UI/UX Design Lead. You’ll be working with a world class team on a product that is renowned for putting usability first and you’ll be reporting to the Chief Product Officer.

Your number one priority is to keep the Zendesk user experience beautiful and hassle-free. You’ll be directing the visual appearance of all new features and enhancements, with a strong focus on simplicity and manageability. This includes initiating, suggesting and spearheading major UI re-factorings for a cleaner and more intuitive user experience.

You have some prior work which you’re very proud to show us, demonstrating a strong graphical flair and an eye for visual consistency. You enjoy designing elegant solutions to complex workflows, and you know the devil is in the details. You love to innovate and design things that people will tweet and blog about."

I agree with Michael.

This isn't about making Studiometry pretty -- that will happen as a natural result of getting the UX/UI design and functionality right. Not only should form follow function, but usually good function results in good form as a byproduct.

Generally there are many improvements to be made with navigation, typography, graphics and layout of the interface; and while the improvements could be listed, I think it would be more efficient to hire a good UX/UI designer. Otherwise the interface is likely to be mired in design by inexpert committee, or improvements will stall due to a long laundry list of features for which it is unclear what should take priority because there is no unifying design rationale or framework.

As examples though:

• The rounded boxes need to be dropped from the notification area, and a different method used to distinguish between items. The current method leads to visual clutter which inhibits good readability. There are numerous other ways the items could be distinguished visually
• Centre justification in preferences should be changed to left justified, and more attention paid to design grids

I could go on...

thanks for your support on this guys. i think its an area studiometry really lacks.

i hope to hear some good news on this front for SM 9

example of how a similar app would look if starting out fresh in this decade ...

http://kickoffapp.com/

obviously short on features compared to SM... but for a 1.0 product, 

it looks mighty nice.

I do hope that Studiometry doesn't start to travel down the lines of an Outlook-esque interface (like Kickoffapp.com - sorry Mosey)

I find the current interface 'adequate' and, sure, 'pretty' would be nice but I don't think major changes in the layout are necessary or desirable. A little polish here and there would work wonders but, other than that, Studiometry is (for me) a dream come true! With the exception of a brief affair with Daylite/Billings, I've been using it since version 4 and I don't envisage straying again. A few tired buttons won't put me off what is the *perfect* app for me to run my business with. :o)

Just my 2c.

I take Sarah's comment and Studiometry staff's lack of direct comment on this thread, to be a  sign that there will be little or no change to the UI in v9 — am I wrong?

Don't take my comments as a sign of *anything*, Michael ;o) They are just that; comments :o)

adequate is not enough for us to be paying out about $1000 a year. 

we need intuitive, easy to navigate. 

ux is not just about good looks. the app is very cluttered. the menus are terrible. lots of redundancy around the app. aged graphics ...

i love the features of SM. . but i can't say I'm not looking for better options.

I take your point, Mosey. When I used the word 'adequate' I was talking about the 'prettiness' of Studiometry, which seemed to be the main point of discussion. Perhaps I was wrong :o)

Those of us with access to 9beta now have a perfect opportunity to bring things like redundancy and suggestions for improved menus to the attention of the devs. Let's make the most of it ;o)

the very first thing i said on this thread:

love the functionality of your app, 

but it desperately need a UX overhaul....

SM9 is scaring me. the calendar looks really bad. but they said not to comment on looks for this beta.

Yes, Mosey. Again, I take your point. My comments were directed at the collective responses to your OP, not you directly. I apologise for any confusion.

Sarah, I'm not sure whose comments you are referring to regarding 'prettiness' since I think the 'collective response' (my comments, Mosey's, David's) go to lengths to define the difference between good user interface design/experience and shallow 'prettiness'. In fact, your comment regarding redundancy and improved menus leads me to believe we are on the same page! I'm worried about Mosey's comments regarding the calendar as this is one of the areas I was hoping would be improved as it's completely useless to me at the moment in both form and function.

Hello Michael :o)

I think we *are* all on the same page, to a point. However, there *have* been references to wanting Studiometry to be better looking. I simply have thrown in my 2c about that being an extremely low priority for me, personally.

"We constantly work on the interface and we need to keep a balance between having it be "pretty" as well as functional."

"i want the app to be sexy and fun to use.....i understand functionality is more important, but it can have both. "

"someone will make an amazing looking piece of software with a similar functionality set, and will outpace you"

"i would love to see studiometry on this site one day: http://beautifulpixels.com/"

Now, *please* don't take this reply as an 'attack' on anyone. I haven't objected to anything anyone said and I don't oppose placing importance on the look of Studiometry at the same time at feature set and usability. I feel I've been somewhat cornered into, first, clarifying my original response and then justifying my follow-ups and that's all I'm doing. :o)

Again, I don't disagree with anyone. I swear! ;o)

I take your point — but I think what Mosey was trying to get at is best summed up when he says "its cluttered, and has 90's graphics . . how is that helpful when trying to manage so much information!" — this echoes my sentiment. The issue isn't the graphics specifically, it's the outmoded approach to UI design, and poor functionality in some visually-based tools (such as the menus, Gantt chart, calendar) which the graphics reflect. So to clarify my position too — I am not making an argument for making studiometry 'better-looking' as an end goal. I am advocating for a refined user interface/experience and better form and functionality. In a pinch, you can drive a nail with a brick, but a hammer is more efficient. As for your first quote from Studiometry itself, I think it's based on a misunderstanding that there is some disparity between good design and functionality — as if they were separate goals.

Phew! Agreed, agreed, agreed.  I feel I can breathe again ;o)

wait I'm pretty sure i can find a few more things to bother you about ....

haha! Oh my GOD! Nothing you said *bothered* me! ;o)

maybe its the black calendar items on the black calendar now that are bothering me from my non color coded clients.

or maybe its all the clashing colors from my blue and orange clients.

ahhhh much better. turned off colors. 

while i think colors is a good idea, it just hurt my eyes. 

I would like to see spell checking in text fields.

I's also like to see a project view similar to the invoice group's view. Sortable and with filters.

A user dashboard of some sort would be cool too.

+1 for the spell checking throughout the app

"In the near future we will be transitioning Studiometry to a Cocoa application"  = Most Excellent!!

"Dashboards are slated for an upcoming release as well, replacing the generic "select a project" screen that fills in now." = Nice, very nice.

I work as a photographer and use photoshop (as you'd expect). Apart from some minor tweaks it looks and behaves much as it did when I first saw it in 1991ish. It's not pretty but it's not ugly either. It is a tool and a complicated one at that. Like any tool you need to learn to use it. I do have a strong desire to see good aesthetics in some software but not so much in software that I'd regard as a tool. Having said all this I'm still deciding whether to buy this software therefore trailing it and have very limited experience with it but also as such I'm keen to know that what I'm learning is relevant. I'm sure a lot of people that know the software and use it day in day out would also like to feel safe in the knowledge that the button to create a new contact is going to be in the same place it is today as it will be tomorrow. Pretty up the fonts and spacing but don't go crazy with all the eye candy that is being used simply to draw people into the apple. Focus on email integration and functionality. I've identified a few areas that I see it could be improved but a UI overhaul isn't going to make my list. I'd like to "un-me too" it. Probably a bit harsh from a trailing perspective so good thing that I can't!

Adrian, I don't know what version of Photoshop you're using but the current generation of creative suite photoshop has a very different user interface than Photoshop 1.0 (http://www.webdesignerdepot.com/2010/02/20-years-of-adobe-photoshop/)! Creative Suite (2008) itself was an unprecedented advancement in the integration, workflow and user interface of Adobe's products, and introduced the new standardized user interface across applications as well as the tabbed interface for running multiple apps. I agree, photoshop is a deep and complex program, which is why the continued refinement of the interface has been critical to it's success. It's also why Photoshop Elements and Adobe Lightroom enjoy success with those users who require a more limited feature set with a much better workflow for specific tasks. The right tool for the right job. It's true that we have to learn to use our tools (and continue to learn, as our 'software' tools keep changing) and I have zero interest in eye candy, but I do have a very keen interest in refined tools. Expertly honed tools save me time and put money in my pocket. I think there is alot of room for improvement in Studiometry's interface and workflow — not in the subjective realm of aesthetic taste, but in it's quantifiable ease of use (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Graphical_user_interface_testing). Here's a little reading on the principles of interaction design from the (Jakob) Nielsen/ (Donald) Norman Group, by "Leading Authority on Software Design" (Hotwired) Bruce Tognazzini: http://www.asktog.com/basics/firstPrinciples.html

"I have zero interest in eye candy, but I do have a very keen interest in refined tools. Expertly honed tools save me time and put money in my pocket. I think there is alot of room for improvement in Studiometry's interface and workflow — not in the subjective realm of aesthetic taste, but in it's quantifiable ease of use "

Michael: Well stated.  I concur. 

"Expertly honed tools save me time and put money in my pocket. I think there is alot of room for improvement in Studiometry's interface and workflow — not in the subjective realm of aesthetic taste, but in it's quantifiable ease of use "

Thanks Michael, I wholeheartedly support this comment and as I mentioned my experience with Studiometry is limited at this early stage therefore a caveat to my opinion. I have experienced UI changes where the developer panders to the whims of users that, for example want a more "mac like" experience to the detriment of the usability of the software. Hard to know what processes where undertaken to get the the end result, but I suspect "experts" where employed in these situations.  I don't think that this software is a candidate for eye candy so I'm glad we agree there too. I suppose it depends which experts you listen too as to the effectiveness of the changes.

I do recognise that Adobe has undertaken UI improvements but the changes havn't really altered the way that you operate in PS all that much, all the menu items are roughly where they have been with a few minor exceptions and there may be more than one way to achieve a certain procedure these days, but generally its been a bit of an onion thing with the core remaining the same and new things wrapped around that core, therefore I maintain that it's much the same as it's always been. I've used it day in day out for 15 years now on a mac.

One of my only stand out UI experiences; again I have somewhat limited experience these days, is that of Ableton Live, an audio workstation designed for live music production and performance. It's a go to as an example of turning incredible complexity into something so simple and intuitive to learn and use (probably to aid pilled up and pissed sound engineers working in the dark of a performance venue). I was up and running on this software in a day. I haven't used it for a few years now but the UI appears much the same as I remember. It's not "mac like" in the faintest and not what I'd want to use for penning emails but for complex tasks such as it's designed for it's perfectly appropriate. I guess this is a bit of an aside, and I'm not suggesting that Oranged use this for inspiration in the slightest, but I would like to say that truly great UI experiences are hard to come by, so take care Oranged people not to make life difficult for your users in the quest to satisfy a few folks that would rather look at something a bit more "mac like" (not this responder by any chalk). It not so much "if it works, don't fix it" but rather spend some money wisely and think long and hard about how it could work better then test it well with people who's opinions you can count on.

Having said all this I'm probably going to duck out of this one as I reckon I probably shot my mouth off without knowing the software well enough and can't really apply these thoughts to Studiometry appropriately, my comments in all honesty are very general about UIs. The long term users are much better qualified to opine.

Thanks for your response Michael and for the reading. I've only scanned through for now as I'm in the process of packing my house to move overseas... a bit time consuming I'm surprised to find ;) I'll dig in down the track though. Looks like a good read.

Just another 2 cent's worth of ideas:

• Have a go at improving the generic mechanisms used to display 'forms' within Studiometry.  Currently the default layout is all sharp edges and forms have the air of being forms originally designed for something like Foxbase which were migrated into VBA for Windows 3.1 and left largely untouched since.  This is partly the layout of specific forms, but also linked to the kinds of widgets used to do things - things like the date picker and associated icon etc.
• Have a really good look at the 'home' screen and try and get away from the 'grid of boxes with stuff in' design metaphor.  Perhaps starting with trying to find a better way to navigate within projects than the 'sub menu' - where some simple nesting might remove some of the flat file complexity there currently.  For example - how about accessing "Project info, settings, specs and notes" all from (or on) the same page?

I also agree with the issue of UI change and its IMPORTANCE. Function is always the primary consideration and Studio has made incredible progress since I purchased the first version of Studio back whenever.

Converting to Cocoa for macs may fix a lot of my comments regarding the UI as this removes the ' stiff ' constraints of Basic.

If you want to see first class UI then visit Contactizer Pro by Objective Decision...they are masters of slick, but alas they have the way with the software.

Go for it Orange team!

Robbie,

See if the following hits spot about what you like about Contactizer Pro.

1. The link anything to anything capability and to be able to see those links regardless of which module you are in.  That is to say the ability to link any item (contact, task, event, communication (notes, emails, chat, facebook, whatever), files, invitations, maps, whatever) to any other item (contact, task, event, communication (notes, emails, chat, facebook, whatever), files, invitations, maps, whatever).  
2. The way the layout show the user in one screen the multiple links to the items listed in #1 above.  For example in the calendar module, the way the tasks would show up in the bottom right hand corner and be sortable to (all, uncompleted, in process, completed, etc.)  Much like Studio is doing with notifications today.  For a second example, the way in contact module you can raise from the bottom the sub-module that holds that contact’s sortable/filterable tasks, events, communications, attachments, maps, whatever.  Much like Studio is doing today with a client’s or project’s items (project info, settings, files, specs, notes, planning, work items, reports, people, summary, etc.)
3. The flexibility way the app allows the user to set their own filters, and module views.  Much like Studio is doing today.  For example in the project module.

And just to toss in a bit more, I understand that Postgre provides the underlying database app techie stuff to make this all happen.  Not that I’m suggesting anything or nothing….

tnx..:)