Honestly, the JIRA example points out one of the main cases where I'm not exactly sure how to replace a toast. You don't have to be on the board to create a ticket in JIRA—so it may not be obvious in context.
I understand there are accessibility issues, but if the thing I am attempting to create will not be visible on the current view, what's the best approach?
Honestly, the same could be set for a large list or Kanban board. Just because of the number of records it may not be evident that the intended action occurred.
I am lucky in that I haven't used Jira in many years, so here are some examples of how GitHub does it:
- create an issue: redirect to the created issue
- create an issue from a project view (kanban board): close the creation modal, stay on the view, and let the newly created issue show up in the list
- create a sub-issue from within an issue open in a side panel of project view: close the creation modal, stay on the parent issue and render the newly created sub-issue in the section called "sub-issues"
Within the awkward constraints where GitHub projects clash with the old UX of issues this is works very well and I know way beyond any reasonable doubt that the desired action has indeed been performed. Error states like failure to create an issue can be rendered in the modal and I can retry right in context too. I fail to see how toasts would add anything.
In a product based on different principles this might not be possible but then the GitHub doc is internal guidance and not a universal rule.
As an aside, GitHub's issue creation modal used in the project view is well executed.
The standard way in desktop GUIs is a status line or similar. In other words, a dedicated area that displays the results of the last action. It has the important property that it doesn’t disappear without user action, and also doesn’t get in the way of what the user may want to see or do.
I’m the design leader for an enterprise software company and would love to get rid of toasts. Places where feedback is immediate don’t need them and simple forms can probably be fine with a banner or alert.
Reasons that toasts are difficult to get rid of:
- Easy for developers to implement consistently.
- Providing feedback where actions are taken on elements not on the screen (like bulk actions on a data grid, or within our workflow).
- Dense UIs where actions are taken frequently and injecting an alert or banner to be dismissed adds a ton of work for users. Also, causing the UI to jump isn’t great.
I quite like the technique of adding a kind of "microtoast" right next to the element that's just been clicked/updated. So you'd click a button, and then directly above or below the button (or even on the button, depending on the notification), you add a bit of text saying the action has been completed. That disappears after a short delay, just like a toast. It's still got some of the accessibility issues that always come with popping up random elements in the UI, but at least it is directly next to where the user is interacting, so they can easily see that what they've done was successful, or failed, or whatever.
This works well for the last category, because it provides feedback but it doesn't need to be dismissed. But it also typically needs to be implemented afresh in each place it's used, which means more fiddly developer work.
All that says, I've lost this battle plenty of times and a lot of the stuff I've worked on ends up getting toasts in the end because they're just so much easier to implement than anything else.
While most seemed to prefer Counter-strike, my childhood gaming was dominated by an Unreal Tournament mod called Tac Ops. While the games looked similar, the mechanics felt very different than Counter-strike. It was a much faster-paced game.
There were a ton of servers with wacky mods. I spent a ton of time on the low-grav servers. There were also some that made the top-scoring player huge. Those odd game modes were a blast.
I love Tac Ops! Was one of the most realistic mods out there (it was sooo easy to die).
I seem to remember there was some behind-the-scenes political / financial shenanigans with Counter Strike and the Game of the Year edition bundle that kind of killed it.
Haha realistic... reminds me that one of my favorite mods back in the day was Action Quake which was more action movie styled and less realistic. Last second sideways jumps in and out of the way were its claim to fame, imo.
> which was more action movie styled and less realistic
Another HL mod I remember fondly in similar veins is "The Specialists". If I remember correctly, it came out around the same time as The Matrix, and had all the fun moves like running on walls in slowmo, jumping forward/sideways and shooting in slowmo, and lots of other stuff. I think I recall it being possible to play both in 1st and 3rd person too, something that was kind of new at that point, unless I misremember.
I think at that I point I probably spent as much time with The Specialists as with Counter-Strike itself (and a cracked copy of 3DS Max 8 for making my own models of course).
That mod was awesome. They somehow managed to make slow motion powerups work in a multiplayer action game without forcing it on every player in the map!
Also had a strange RPG community entirely separate from the main game… funny how these random subcultures evolve in unexpected places.
Wow thats a name I haven't heard in a long time! I really miss the way tacops 2.2 felt, never did get along with 3.x versions. Was definitely a formative gaming experience for me as well
Like most things I’m sure you can overdo it. But if you’re choosing between cereal and a bagel or a couple of eggs, I think most would be better off with the eggs.
I think you're right, the roles will exist for some time. But I think we'll start to see more and more overlap between engineering, product management and design.
In a lot of ways I think that will lead to stronger delivery teams. As a designer—the best performing teams I've been on have individuals with a core competency, but a lot of overlap in other areas. Product managers with strong engineering instincts, engineers with strong design instincts, etc. When there is less ambiguity in communication, teams deliver better software.
Longer-term I'm unsure. Maybe there is some sort of fusion into all-purpose product people able to do everything?
No, I'm looking for an html page with a button "Select LLM". After pressing that button and selecting a local LLM from disk, it would show an input field where you can type your question and then it would use the given LLM to create the answer.
I'm not sure what OpenWebUI is, but if it was what I mean, they would surely have the page live and not ask users to install Docker etc.
It's both what you want and not; the chat/question interface is as you describe, lack-of-installation is not. The LLM work is offloaded to other software, not the browser.
I would like to skip maintaining all this crap, though: I like your approach
You should install it, because it's exactly what you just described.
Edit: From a UI perspective, it's exactly what you described. There's a dropdown where you select the LLM, and there's a ChatGPT-style chatbox. You just docker-up and go to town.
Maybe I don't understand the rest of the request, but I can't imagine a software where a webpage exists and it just magically has LLMs available in the browser with no installation?
It doesn't seem exactly like what they are describing. The end-user interface is what they are describing but it sounds like they want the actual LLM to run in the browser (perhaps via webgpu compute shaders). Open WebUI seems to rely on some external executor like ollama/llama.cpp, which naturally can still be self-hosted but they are not executing INSIDE the browser.
Does that even exist? It's basically what they described but with some additional installation? Once you install it, you can select the LLM on disk and run it? That's what they asked for.
Apparently it does, though I'm learning about it for the first time in this thread also. Personally, I just run llama.cpp locally in docker-compose with anythingllm for the UI but I can see the appeal of having it all just run in the browser.
I have mixed thoughts on this post. I’m a pretty senior product designer. V0, Gemini and these other tools
Can build pretty impressive prototypes. I am repeatedly asked how I am using these AI tools in my workflow. The answer is—I’m not really.
These tools are a novelty now. But I do think these will improve drastically in the next 5 or so years. When they have more context about the existing code base and design system and customer issues I think we’ll see a big leap forward.
Does that mean SaaS is dead?
Maybe small CRUD apps with few users? I think a lot of people on this forum miss that with enterprise software, business are buying processes. The software is just the codified way to execute on that.
AI is already making these processes different. But I think we’re probably going to see more SaaS to replace old and support new processes.
Yep. Processes, consistency, support, all of it. Bespoke apps are great in the long tail of one-to-few users but otherwise you actually do want dedicated people working on the tool.
I work on design systems for an enterprise software company. I was talking with one of the engineers on the team about how great it would be if there were better built in browser-based solutions for things like autocomplete, select and multi-select.
I mean in the future there are probably no PMs, Designers or Engineers. All those roles are going to converge. There will be a bunch of people that build and manage the software that creates software.
I understand there are accessibility issues, but if the thing I am attempting to create will not be visible on the current view, what's the best approach?
Honestly, the same could be set for a large list or Kanban board. Just because of the number of records it may not be evident that the intended action occurred.
reply