[wolfgang42]

My first thought on seeing this headline was "what, again?"

Don't get me wrong, the new design looks great, but it feels like every six months they switch between having side navigation and putting everything on top. Every time they change there's a definite improvement, but you'd think they'd be able to come up with a design that works for at least a few years.

[StanAngeloff]

My thoughts exactly. We've used GitLab since version 6 [1] and things have always felt like they are in a state of flux ([2] [3] [4]). For an open source project this is tolerable. I do wonder what enterprise users make of this constant UI change? Now that the navigation is back on the left, we'll probably see it collapsible in 9.5 and then morphed into a horizontal bar by version 10, rinse and repeat.

[1]: https://about.gitlab.com/images/6_0/mr_on_fork.png [2]: https://about.gitlab.com/images/8_0/ci_dash.png [3]: https://about.gitlab.com/images/9_0/navigation.png [4]: https://about.gitlab.com/images/blogimages/redesigning-gitla...

[bshimmin]

As someone who has never used GitLab, it is perhaps interesting to note that I would have literally no idea of the chronology of those images you've linked; if I had to guess, I would say the grey one (1) looks older than the purple one (4), but the other two look almost entirely unrelated.

[StanAngeloff]

The images 1…4 are in chronological order, the URLs contain the version if interested. However, should you look at them in any order or sequence, it goes to show how different the UI has looked throughout the life of the product.

[Bromskloss]

> For an open source project this is tolerable. I do wonder what enterprise users make of this constant UI change?

That's interesting to think about. What is the difference between the two types of users? Is it that the open source project is in no hurry and can accept a delay due to interface hassles? Is it that enterprise users are less capable and need a stable environment to function?

[StanAngeloff]

From my exposure to enterprise users, they are usually the sort of environment where hundreds, if not thousands, of employees work. Can you imagine how one "angry" of UI changes person in a team of a dozen scales set against that? With open-source users, it's more decentralised IMHO.

[corobo]

From my exposure to enterprise users their Gitlab updates will be wedged in the middle of a 2 year change control process and will jump over many iterations of design changes

[TeMPOraL]

If they were clever, they could structure the release schedule so that the enterprise customers which started with top navigation will renew when the top navigation is current again, and those who started with side navigation will renew when side navigation is on the mainline... ;).

[melicerte]

When I read your questions, I immediately though: Enterprise users need processes. Processes goes by documentation. If you have to change your documentation once every 6 months because the blue button on the bottom left is now yellow on the top right...

[svesselov]

We are glad to hear you like the new design and feel that each change has been an improvement. We value iteration here at GitLab, making the smallest change possible and getting it out as quickly as possible. This allows us to ship, gather feedback, and readjust quickly. You can learn more about our process here: https://about.gitlab.com/handbook/values/#iteration

[eknkc]

Same here, each time they change it completely, I need to learn using it efficiently back again.

GitHub does ui changes too but they seem to have a decent structure to work on, not changing stuff dramatically.

[pleasecalllater]

Yea, mine too :) And really, this doesn't sound good for Gitlab.

[_pmf_]

Agreed; changing business software for change's sake is plain evil and will cost you customers. People still use the Bugzilla UI with 76 mandatory input fields and like it that way.

[cyphar]

I believe that you're expemplifying survivor bias. People use Bugzilla despite its horrible UI (and in fact, I know of several teams that have GreaseMonkey scripts that create an alternative UI on top of the base Bugzilla one). Bugzilla does a lot of things right, but its UI is not one of them.

GitLab had similar problems with its UI, and they've been improving it. Personally I welcome the improvements (though we use CE and not EE internally).

[tnolet]

Salesforce is a great example. It is amazingly "old fashioned", tiny and uses non of the UX paradigms of the last 10 years. However, it gets work done really, really well. I'm disregarding the Lightning-UI versions for now.

[samsolomon]

I think Salesforce's advantage is its ecosystem and integrations.

However, I would not cite Salesforce as a reference for good UX. It is very labor intensive to get where you need. It takes a ton clicks to get places within the CRM—simple places like to find a contact profile. The Lightening UI makes the click areas for buttons and fields larger, but does not reduce the time or effort it takes to get places within the CRM.

My previous company, Trustfuel, built a business off of Salesforce being a pain for customer success managers to use. Note taking also sucks in Salesforce—Get Pattern's business is building a better note taking tool for AE's.

[tekknolagi]

This happened with GitHub too, IIRC.