102 EDGE Version new whm theme
Hi
When I installed the 102 edge version for testing, I saw that the whm theme changed and I didn't like it at all.
Will we be able to use the old whm theme in version 102?
-
@enricodias - I confirmed this is working well in the main version of Firefox (currently 99) on both PC and Mac machines. We aren't able to ensure that all ports of all browsers will work, but we definitely test with all major browsers before pushing things to a public release. 0 -
It"s baffling to me that WHM/cPanel decided to forcibly deploy a new UI to their customers, then do a focus group in an online forum like this one to determine if their customers like it. And to top it off, there is currently no way to revert back to the previous UI if they don"t like the new one. The UI is one of the most important factors which determines efficiency, productivity, and a good user experience, which in our case is getting things done quickly. News flash, reading/parsing through a lot of text is NOT efficient. Icons that look very similar DOES NOT help us find what we want quickly. Example: You tell me which UI is easier and faster to" "Create a New Account" or "List Accounts"? VS 0 -
It"s baffling to me that WHM/cPanel decided to forcibly deploy a new UI to their customers, then do a focus group in an online forum like this one to determine if their customers like it. And to top it off, there is currently no way to revert back to the previous UI if they don"t like the new one. The UI is one of the most important factors which determines efficiency, productivity, and a good user experience, which in our case is getting things done quickly. News flash, reading/parsing through a lot of text is NOT efficient. Icons that look very similar DOES NOT help us find what we want quickly. Example: You tell me which UI is easier and faster to" "Create a New Account" or "List Accounts"? 77333 VS 77337
Yeah so, first screenshot is better a UI... Secondary is like a downgrade for sure..0 -
I can't just understand this WHM 102 is more painfully and unable to see where you had an experience of options and anything than the current WHM theme, I would go back to the original if tweaks or revert will be available again... I'd go with WHM and cPanel for Paper Lantern Theme, but retro is lovely as well. If a choice of people customer who would like to choose one current style is a very important 100%... If without a customer choice and only cPanel Designer prefers one style rework anything without a Style chooser is not okay...
Hey @HyperWave @shenzy, Have you read this message? Am I right?0 -
Hey @HyperWave @shenzy, Have you read this message? Am I right?
You are absolutely correct! It pisses me off when I'm forced to use a UI when selections are not easily identifiable with a quick scan.0 -
You are absolutely correct! It pisses me off when I'm forced to use a UI when selections are not easily identifiable with a quick scan.
Indeed, I think we should make a new thread out for a voting poll on who someone can vote for one UI... If you can make it like that, let me know!0 -
I'm happy to listen to feedback and make sure that it gets forwarded to the developers, but we aren't going to be looking at any polls. There was one opened already about this issue which I closed, as we don't plan to restore the old interface at this time. 0 -
I'm happy to listen to feedback and make sure that it gets forwarded to the developers, but we aren't going to be looking at any polls. There was one opened already about this issue which I closed, as we don't plan to restore the old interface at this time.
Hello, who decided that a new template was needed? Who was that genius that i would like to meet! And why there is no option to have "Retro" template or Paper Lantern? This posture is incredible, because it seems we are talking to a damm wall... You say that the team is taking feedback... so how is that going after 13 pages of costumers complaining? I have to be the sucker here... but i really need to point the obvious here... We don"t want the new template, we didn"t need it in the first place... There are so many things that are in need of cpanel optimizing and adding corrections and features added... The UI and template where NOT ONE of them... Best Regards,0 -
Does CPanel legally own the Paper Lantern theme or is it being used under some form of contract or license? Perhaps this could be why the rushed out new theme, because whoever created the Paper Lantern theme wants to be renumerated for their work being deployed across thousands of servers? Just an idea.... 0 -
@martin MHC - no. You say that the team is taking feedback... so how is that going after 13 pages of costumers complaining?
It's been going great. A quick search shows me 15 cases that our developers have created specifically from user requests, which include the following: -adjusting the search values to better respond to keywords -restore the hostname, OS, platform, and cPanel version to the header -improve WHM notifications -improve font readability -add left navigation filter -support for larger logo sizes -remove the Solutions area -remove the Paper Lantern deprecation message for end users Several of those are still "in progress" but all are directly taken from user feedback, much of which is in this thread.0 -
I really need the left-hand filter bar for the navigation back. I used that CONSTANTLY and it was such a handy time-saver. Not having it is causing a lot of clicking and scrolling that I'd rather not do. Just let me filter again! Edit: Looks like this was added this morning, thank you! 0 -
Cpanel is just doing like big companies on the market so they use customers to beta test their products. Basically I suppose they should have top notch designers, ux-ui experts and employees that may test the entire flow and check if everything is just working as it should but seems that we need to give the feedback to them. From our point of view the entire interface was done skipping big parts of ux-ui logic making everything more slow and complicated, said this imho they shall get some design team to solve the issue or roll everything as it was before. 0 -
Edit: Looks like this was added this morning, thank you!
what version of cPanel are you using where you see the left filter bar ?0 -
I'm not sure - even Edge doesn't currently have that yet, so maybe he's referring to something else? 0 -
How do you justify the forced migration of all these people onto an interface still not ready?
Because they are effectively a monopoly when it comes to mainstream hosting control panels. Before the current owners bought out the company and went full corporate leech there were decades of "cpanel hosting" being the sought after standard. Every major host offered it, it was incredibly affordable and easy to use, so as all those small businesses grew to the point of needing their own servers of course that's what they went with. The company knows that millions of servers can't be migrated without literally re-provisioning the entire server each time so they have no need to both with things like QA and beta testing within the community before making huge changes for no discernible reason other than just to have something different. -Michael0 -
Dear cPanel !!!! Please change back to the previous WHM theme !!!!!! What's wrong with you there ?! I really really have enough from that bulls**t blue/white theme! Hell. 0 -
For those interested in the reintroduction of a filter to the left nav, here's what that looks like. So far as I know, this is not currently in any public build but it should arrive soon (last few rounds of QA and then merge procedures left to do). Couple of things of note: - It uses the same search algorithm as found in cPanel & WHM 98 and older for now. In a future version we are going to update that algorithm to make it more tolerant of typos and we'll sneak some more metadata about each link into the search index than before.
- It does not replace the search in the top navigation. That search will remain there and we'll continue to work on making that area more and more useful. (Not sure if anyone noticed yet, but it now returns Accounts in addition to features)
- Keyboard navigation should be roughly the same as in cPanel & WHM v98. Note the new keyboard shortcut to jump into this search, though.
0 -
I'm happy to listen to feedback and make sure that it gets forwarded to the developers, but we aren't going to be looking at any polls. There was one opened already about this issue which I closed, as we don't plan to restore the old interface at this time.
Hello @cPRex, you say: "we don't plan to restore the old interface at this time". but what we are asking for is MUCH simpler, so simple that I did it myself but the update rewrites the change... () What we are asking for is something as basic as keeping the previous ICONS. Even with that small change they would help a lot. The new interface has its advantages, a clear example of this is the responsive format, but the choice of "minimalist" icons has been a nightmare for many of its clients. How difficult is it to allow the use of a different set of images?0 -
Hello @cPRex, you say: "we don't plan to restore the old interface at this time". but what we are asking for is MUCH simpler, so simple that I did it myself but the update rewrites the change... (
I think we can talk out the private conversation and restore WHM and cPanel UI's original design for tweakers' third-party templates.0 -
You can control how a web page displays using css. In the case of Firefox create a file called userContent.css and place it in a folder called 'chrome' (create it if it doesn't exist) in the appropriate profile folder. Here is some css to get rid of the stuff at the top and group the icons into one window, and make the left sidebar less obtrusive. It's not perfect but much better. I started with trimming the boxes at the top but after a while just hid them in favour of bringing the icons back into one window. Leave out the bits for hiding the top boxes and hiding the stats box if you still want to see those. /*make the top boxes less big */ .cp-group__header { padding: 0px !important; } /*make the top boxes less big */ .cp-app { padding: .1em !important; } /*make the top boxes less big */ h1.section-header { padding-bottom: 0px !important; } /* hides the wordings in the top box */ .cp-app__details-description { display: none !important; } /* hide the stats box */ #stats { display: none !important; } /* hides the top boxes altogether */ .tools-stats-grid-container { display: none !important; } /* make the icons column flex */ #tools { display: flex !important; flex-wrap: wrap !important; } /* make the icons column narrow and give icon bars padding */ .cp-group:not(.expanded) { padding: 10px !important; width: 250px !important; } /* icon bar margin */ .mb-1 { margin-bottom: 5px !important; } /* hide the title 'Tools' */ h1.section-header { display: none !important; } /* stops icon bar & dropdown moving to the right if there's only one entry */ .row { min-width: 220px !important; } /* left sidebar colours*/ :root { --cp-primary-color: #6686cc !important; --cp-primary-contrast-text: #ffffff !important; --cp-disabled-color: #ddd !important; } 0 -
a bad joke In January I was already reporting my dissatisfaction with this interface developed by an inexperienced team Feedbacks are taken as jokes to developers 4 months my friends and NOTHING has changed, an interface not friendly and confusing to the abtual user of WHM / Cpanel, And I leave a message, data for everyone here, it's no use giving feedbacks I did that I have 3 accounts with proxy in my ips in all of which were given for months continuously and none of them was effectively implemented by cpanel simple things I recommend not wasting time as you will not be taken to anyone. The same issues as in the EDGE 102 version are still present in Stable. It is difficult to help if cpanel ignores any feedback. just a proof of a simple report that was given to cpanel in january How difficult is it to do this? Remove the limitation px, by a simple 100% /usr/local/cpanel/base/frontend/jupiter/_assets/css/master-ltr.cmb.min.css wrong: {.container-lg{max-width:1320px}} correct {.container-lg{max-width:100%}} I reported this in January and I believe that not even showing the ridiculously simple solution will deploy. cpanel a disappointment Now if we as users have to go out fixing errors that cpanel should solve, what is the need to pay a license? Wow how hard to do that right cpanel /usr/local/cpanel/base/frontend/jupiter/assets/application_icons/sprites Replace with old files CSS / SVG What is the justification for this lousy exchange work? It is not possible to customize jupiter is a cpanel fallacy, everything is in the same path everything has the same name It is a very poorly done and executed job. and finally, dear friends, if we look closely, cpanel Jupiter is simply the same layout as the paper (glass) with 3 ridiculous changes that I will leave marked here, showing that cpanel took 4 months to deliver us more of the same <3 0 -
a bad joke In January I was already reporting my dissatisfaction with this interface developed by an inexperienced team Feedbacks are taken as jokes to developers 4 months my friends and NOTHING has changed, an interface not friendly and confusing to the abtual user of WHM / Cpanel, And I leave a message, data for everyone here, it's no use giving feedbacks I did that I have 3 accounts with proxy in my ips in all of which were given for months continuously and none of them was effectively implemented by cpanel simple things I recommend not wasting time as you will not be taken to anyone. The same issues as in the EDGE 102 version are still present in Stable. It is difficult to help if cpanel ignores any feedback. just a proof of a simple report that was given to cpanel in january How difficult is it to do this? Remove the limitation px, by a simple 100% /usr/local/cpanel/base/frontend/jupiter/_assets/css/master-ltr.cmb.min.css wrong: {.container-lg{max-width:1320px}} correct {.container-lg{max-width:100%}} I reported this in January and I believe that not even showing the ridiculously simple solution will deploy. cpanel a disappointment Now if we as users have to go out fixing errors that cpanel should solve, what is the need to pay a license? Wow how hard to do that right cpanel /usr/local/cpanel/base/frontend/jupiter/assets/application_icons/sprites Replace with old files CSS / SVG What is the justification for this lousy exchange work? It is not possible to customize jupiter is a cpanel fallacy, everything is in the same path everything has the same name It is a very poorly done and executed job. and finally, dear friends, if we look closely, cpanel Jupiter is simply the same layout as the paper (glass) with 3 ridiculous changes that I will leave marked here, showing that cpanel took 4 months to deliver us more of the same <3
True, I'm making a backup for paper paper_lantern in cPanel and I'll try to get one WHM original style later..0 -
@Bakugan - I did just make a post about changes we made based off user feedback. We aren't able to make every change that users request, but to say we haven't listened to end-users at this point is just not true. 0 -
@Bakugan - I did just make a post about changes we made based off user feedback. We aren't able to make every change that users request, but to say we haven't listened to end-users at this point is just not true.
@cPPex, More than saying if it's fair or not, maybe cPanel should review why their clients/users are having such a negative reaction. This is not something recent, it is the accumulation of many things that have not been taken into account. As an example, he could mention a requirement that has not been taken into account for 6 years and is related to a critical element of the system: Backups . you didn't take it into account, and your answer was "you want better backups?... pay for them!"0 -
@Bakugan - I did just make a post about changes we made based off user feedback. We aren't able to make every change that users request, but to say we haven't listened to end-users at this point is just not true.
I can say that no, cpanel is not paying attention to feedbacks, I follow the forum daily in addition to countless groups of companies that have already tried to take memso via ticket to cpanel First answer these questions if you are really paying attention: 1 - WHY is cpanel forcing the use of jupiter? 2- WHY cpanel didn't make a transition between paper -> jupiter in WHM, where both would be available but would give customers some time to adapt. 3- because Jupiter is only 3 different from paper(glass), I know that many things have changed I saw the code. 4- WHY cpanel has difficulty solving silly things as I mentioned in my previous topic It's hard to replace this: {.container-lg{max-width:1320px}} That is why ? {.container-lg{max-width:100%}} 5- BECAUSE cpanel ignores its entire community saying that JUPITER is not GOOD, and I insist on forcing its use, it seems that they don't understand that the problem is not us sysadmins but the customers It's the customers who are complaining and without a customer they don't have $ to pay cpanel I really don't understand the difficulty of fixing silly things that any dev who took a 30 hour online basic course would solve If I'm complaining here it's because I still trust cpanel and I believe it can change this scenario, but every day that passes it seems that we are here hindering and not helping. I really hope you answer every question because what the community has been feeling is a total disregard on the part of cpanel with its customers0 -
1 - WHY is cpanel forcing the use of jupiter?
When evaluating the theme support in WHM, we found considerable issues throughout the UX caused by running more than one theme. The economic decision was made to directly modify the current theme, rather than build and maintain two concurrent themes, and to drop semblances of support in this area in the long term. We intend direct updates to the WHM theme on an on-going bases both in WHM as well as in cPanel. Future changes will be iterative in nature and not as shocking as this first change.2- WHY cpanel didn't make a transition between paper -> jupiter in WHM, where both would be available but would give customers some time to adapt.
This is ultimately the same answer as given to question 1.3- because Jupiter is only 3 different from paper(glass), I know that many things have changed I saw the code.
Unclear what you're trying to say here. Jupiter in WHM as well as in cPanel moved to new technologies under the hood for a number of things throughout the UI's chrome. We did persist individual features' code from the prior version. Many of these areas are up for rewrite or consolidation in the coming years as well.4- WHY cpanel has difficulty solving silly things as I mentioned in my previous topic It's hard to replace this: {.container-lg{max-width:1320px}} That is why ? {.container-lg{max-width:100%}}
The change you propose would have adverse affects on the readability of interfaces and ultimately cause design regression throughout features whose individual interfaces do not anticipate full screen widths. Should we see prevalent use of widescreen monitors in our analytics, we may reconsider this in the future. I'd encourage those who care deeply about widescreen support to let us know over on features.cpanel.net or to participate in Interface Analytics.5- BECAUSE cpanel ignores its entire community saying that JUPITER is not GOOD, and I insist on forcing its use, it seems that they don't understand that the problem is not us sysadmins but the customers
Again not sure what you're trying to say here. Not only do we actively engage here in the forums (primarily through @cPRex though often as individuals as well), we also actively engage on the features.cpanel.net site, send out surveys both in the interface and directly, and monitor feedback through tickets and other avenues. We are working to be more responsive to the feedback we gather, and you can read more about those efforts0 -
BTW, Thanks for censuring and removing my inconvenient post... The situation at hand is all that clear... but its better to just look the other way around... Keep up the good work... Best Regards, 0 -
@Paulus Cobris - If you have something relevant to the 102 interface discussion, please let us know. 0 -
For those interested in helping us understand more about widescreen support, I went ahead and created Widescreen support to begin that conversation! 0 -
When evaluating the theme support in WHM, we found considerable issues throughout the UX caused by running more than one theme. The economic decision was made to directly modify the current theme, rather than build and maintain two concurrent themes, and to drop semblances of support in this area in the long term. We intend direct updates to the WHM theme on an on-going bases both in WHM as well as in cPanel. Future changes will be iterative in nature and not as shocking as this first change. This is ultimately the same answer as given to question 1. Unclear what you're trying to say here. Jupiter in WHM as well as in cPanel moved to new technologies under the hood for a number of things throughout the UI's chrome. We did persist individual features' code from the prior version. Many of these areas are up for rewrite or consolidation in the coming years as well. The change you propose would have adverse affects on the readability of interfaces and ultimately cause design regression throughout features whose individual interfaces do not anticipate full screen widths. Should we see prevalent use of widescreen monitors in our analytics, we may reconsider this in the future. I'd encourage those who care deeply about widescreen support to let us know over on features.cpanel.net or to participate in Interface Analytics. Again not sure what you're trying to say here. Not only do we actively engage here in the forums (primarily through @cPRex though often as individuals as well), we also actively engage on the features.cpanel.net site, send out surveys both in the interface and directly, and monitor feedback through tickets and other avenues. We are working to be more responsive to the feedback we gather, and you can read more about those efforts
0
Please sign in to leave a comment.
Comments
399 comments