hello Matt!

* Configurable grid size (like tight, medium, loose?)

it’s so cool that I spoke to Maurizio a few hours ago… looks like we’re heading the right way 🙂
This will happen in the software, but not too soon. It needs quite some work and I guess you can live without it…

* Better yet, select multiple tabbles (with box) and then select an arrangement style and grid spacing, leaving the unselected others as they are. This would allow one to arrange some tabbles in tightly-knit groups, and other in loose or free form layout.

* right-click choice or better yet, double-click in void performs alt-z (sometimes the auto arrange blasts tabbles out of view! )

the right-click in the void is also planned, the double click -> alt-z sounds very smart!

* As mentioned by others, a more traditional menu bar

Ok, but how? What bothers you exactly, the graphic layout or the buttons names? Which buttons would you have?

* right-click in void – choice for to create new tabble

already planned

* right-click on tabble – choice to copy (gives you same color, allows name change. Does not copy links to files(or maybe it does, as an option))

uh, good call here as well! 🙂

By the way, we’re thinking of publishing our development plan… I wrote a while ago that we’re sorting the requests and indeed we are 🙂

Thanks again for the contribution!

P.S.: are your colleagues still chuckling at Tabbles?

A.

"Andrea" wrote:

* As mentioned by others, a more traditional menu bar

Ok, but how? What bothers you exactly, the graphic layout or the buttons names? Which buttons would you have?

I think what folks are talking about here is making the menu bar closer to "standard" software. Most windows program’s menu bar follow a pretty standard formula; File – Edit – View – Tools – Help.

I don’t think it has anything to do with a like or dislike of the menu graphics you’re using, but relates directly to that learning curve you’re trying to shorten. Folks are used to the ‘standard’ menu structure and have general ideas of what they will find there. You wouldn’t need to get rid of the graphical look of it, in fact I hope you don’t (just my 2 cents), but following the standard menu ‘pattern’ would probably go a long way in making the program more intuitive.

Thanks guys,

I see your points but I have a hard time seeing how we can fit our current functions into a more traditional menu?
Now functions are grouped by similarities, and we tried to make it as minimalistic as possible.

We need to give it reflect about this carefully, and then do a couple of tests

but thanks again for the input, very precious indeed!!! 😀