New Resources UI

In the new resource UI view, when viewing configuration backups, the icon labelled “View Full Screen” simply opens a small dialog window in the middle of the view, which is hardly “full screen”.  I was expecting it to take up the full view.

I've had the same experience. Everything is slow, and it's never quite clear if the back button started navigating somewhere.

I’ve noticed this primarily with the properties table. I readjust the width of the columns, but the next time i navigate away and back, the default width (which hardly takes advantage of the available screen real estate) is back again. I’ve reordered the columns, and that doesn’t stick either.

My subject line disappeared. This is “Table settings are not persistent”. While I appreciate that the PMs don’t have any idea how to navigate the community, putting all responses for resources under this one thread is going to be unsustainable. Why not just instruct us to tag with either “Resources, UIv4” or “Reports, UIv4” or “Services, UIv4”.

I’ve already lost where my things are. And it appears that feedback is being deleted. It’s also going to make it harder to see which problems should be the highest priority in getting fixed. When someone comes in, they’ll have to read through this entire thread to see if someone has already mentioned the problem they are bringing to light. 

I know you didn’t delete mine, which is why I didn’t say it was deleted. I said it appears to have been deleted. There’s no notification to the OP and no linkage from the old location to the new location.

Use tags to track stuff. Especially since artifacts will be reused across pages. Tables applies to all UIv4 pages where they exist. Are you going to move my post to the other features when the PM finally figures that out? Tags would handle this.

Noticed a couple of things I would like to highlight

• Search for resources clicking on the name no longer works when selecting a resource, you need to press the magnifying glass, at least when using a MAC not sure on other devices.   The same is true when navigating the folder structure.
• The Info tab I personally found the previous layout more usable the layout now is not as intuitive.
• When checking config sources we see the error below using Standard Configs (SSH Exec) module and clicking on show running config:

  Error

  Duplicate entry 'csInstance_10698135' for key 'name' Query being executed when exception was thrown: insert into s7662d3db41df4626a85d9ca6a98071d9.configurations (name, value) values ('csInstance_10698135','1652156450739')

• The graphs when selecting a device in this case an Arista switch are not the critical statistics such as CPU, Memory, throughput but more likely the first few data sources, admittedly this probably is configurable, but typically for infrastructure resources CPU, Memory, Throughput etc are common graphs you would want to look at rather than fan speed and device temperature.

These are the ones that I have found at the moment not really noticed a speed issue though.

Hi, full screen (or tab) would be best in my view.

I would also echo the comments of others that the new UI is very slow and sluggish.  

Just got access to the new UI late last week and have to reiterate what @David Marsh said, the new UI is almost unusably slow.

Also on the resources page having to click precisely on the greater than (>) symbol or magnifying glass to expand stuff out rather than just clicking on the item itself is irritating.

The two combine into a very frustrating user experience where you’re guessing why the UI isn’t responding to what you’re trying to do.

Agreed, the spreadsheet view of the new Info tab is a step backwards in look/feel.

I’m not concluded on that. I’ve found the search option pretty handy since we have so many properties i ended up using the browser’s search capability in most cases anyway.

In a meeting with the UI folks, I did suggest that the different sections if the info page should have the same layout options as the graphs page. Give me the ability to put them into 1, 2, or 3 columns. On a tall monitor (regular monitor rotated 90 degrees) the one column makes sense. With a widescreen monitor, there’s a lot of wasted screen space if they can’t be side by side. Not sure why it would be terribly difficult, CSS knows how to deal with wrapping of divs on wide vs. skinny screens. 

Honesty is the best policy. Truly, customer’s honest feedback and criticism allows us to make changes to the product in the future. Appreciate the transparency David!