EVE Information Portal

Ah, i think you misunderstood, i meant CCP listen to tippia. i've edited my post for clarity

Yea... I still think that this new inventory system is something I could live with as long they start to think it more like an access point or starting point to item management. In space it can be as basic as the cargo hold without side panel and with some basic functionality (ie ability to move item from loot container to parent cargo hold window*) and in station it can be something much bigger. The very basic idea behind this system however has to be that user wants to open new windows, opening them should be easy and their positions should be saved.

*) can be made possible for example by adding back button to top bar and having it behaving as hotspot for item drag and drop transfer at same time

In fact I would think outside the box and actually give users the possibility to permanently "separate" the active ships cargo hold from the unified inventory to external window. This is mainly because it is most used window, contents of it are relevant in space and in station (ammo, courier items, free space) and it even indicates in which ship you are in unless other ways visible. Double clicking hangar background should open this window just like it does now. It shouldn't mess with main unified inventory's current target (like it does in test server atm).

If you start thinking cargo hold and main unified inventory window as 2 different "entities", everything becomes much cleared and easier when separating station and space behaviour. In fact it would be really easy. Both windows have their positions and state saved. Most people will probably keep both open in station and main unified inventory window closed in space. To make things even more convenient, the cargo hold window, even when used in smallest possible size with all the extra junk hidden, could have button to open then main unified inventory window.

This together with change in think process towards the goals of having unified inventory window as starting point for more windows (ie. shiftdoubleclicking any container, folder, ship and so on should open new window) and you got at least my approval. For safety I would definitely recommend adding similar shifty functionality to "open target"-button in space.

Other thing worth mentioning is the neocom again. As minimizing the windows - chat, item management or browser window - has become real fun since the wonderful update - I would warmly recommend thinking about adding narrow 9-10 pixel task bar to bottom of the screen where you can minimize windows so that their labels remain visible. This would also host area for these additional inventory windows and you would get rid of the problem you are having with the inventory function's neocom button at the moment. Hell you could also have space to reinvent the date to the clock (!).

...but then again this will never happen or even be considered so why even bother writing.

There is this and then there is the version of using this as excuse.

CCP, please listen to the host of comments about this new system.

It is more cumbersome, takes longer to do what you want and does not really add anything. Please scrap it. Please. It is awful.


We hold out some hope that CCP listens to everyone this time. A faint hope, but a hope.

Can we reprocess/sell things directly out of a container?

Awsome,

Have you considered adding BPO/BPC and DamagedY/N in filter?

I also think that a overall INVERT checkbox will be a good plus to filter system.

The problem is that the new inventory system isn't aware of the fact that it can have two windows open, so any time you open a new container of any kind, it appears in both windows — this renders the point of having both windows set up largely pointless because now they're showing the same thing. Opening a new container should either spawn a new window, or it should be turing complete and figure out which window it needs to open in (this won't happen). Opening two windows creates a whole bunch of new problems and inefficiencies because both windows assume that they are a single-window interface.

No. It's just that copy/paste is a idiotic hack of a solution to a problem that should never have existed, that came about back in the day because Microsoft thought they could do multi-location file management in a single window. Having two windows or a dual-pane window (that work properly) completely removes any need to have this functionality because you see both locations at once and don't need to flip-flop between them with a copy/paste-buffer to hold the information while you move from one location to the other. In fact, the mere fact that copy/paste is needed is a HUGE warning bell going off, telling us that something inefficient is going on that requires this kind of clumsy solution… (not to mention that a good modern file manager will have replaced copy/paste with a drop stack, where you shovel in a bunch of files from multiple locations for later use at some other locations).

Then you don't understand the complaint. The new system is excellent in many ways — it's just not up to the task of handling many common use-cases because it tries to do something that is actually very inefficient purely because it seems like a good design choice to do so.

Again (and trying to be a bit clearer this time), I think the problem lies with what they've included in the term “inventory”. Some things belong in a unified system like this, but there are also things that are better handled outside of it (at least primarily — if they also appear in the unified window for those who run at low resolutions or some such, then that's fine). For instance, when I think “inventory”, I see things like the station hangar, the corp hangar, the asset list, the corp asset list… and maybe the corp delivery hangar. I do not see things like ship cargo holds, drone bays, jetcans, wrecks, etc.

This doesn't mean that those other item containers couldn't benefit greatly from this UI — it just means they perhaps shouldn't be part of the same tree structure. If I open my Nomad's cargo hold, it would be wonderful if it displayed a tree structure like the one the new UI offers, so I could browse through all the freight containers and the crap inside them as if they were subdirectories. However, it should be the Nomad itself that is the root of that tree structure, not [GenericRootInventoryObjectInstance]. Likewise, the list of inventories I mentioned earlier would all fit neatly under the root object “Station”, and then the various hangars are first-level branches on that tree structure.

In a way, this division is already apparent in the new inventory system, but the problem is that they all trace back to that Generic Root, rather than being roots themselves, and this is (I imagine, conceptually) why new inventories are unable to determine which window they belong in: because all windows are the same. Opening a new inventory makes it go “ok, so I will now show up in the inventory window”, except that “the inventory window” happens to be three different windows the way I've set it up, and it now opens in all of them because they're just linked instances of each other and there is no way to tell them apart.

Imagine instead that I could “detach” any of these root locations from the main inventory window — I could have a window that is the station inventory, and nothing else. If I open a wreck, it will not appear in that window because wrecks are not sub-branches of the station inventory root. Or I detach the “ship” root (which shows any and all ships I can interact with at this point), and then go off to fiddle with my POS — opening up the Advanced Lab module will now spawn a new window, because the only inventory window available at the time is the “Ship” tree, and POS modules are not a sub-category of that tree. Exactly how it would determine where to open if multiple windows were available is a tricky question, but personally, I would prefer if it figured out which one will make for the most “shallow” tree, because it's much kinder to the user if he doesn't have to dig though 18 layers to get to where he wants to be… So if both the all-encompassing inventory is available (of which Advanced Labs is a subsubsub[…]-category) and a “POS modules”-root window is open, it will choose the latter because it's that much closer to the Advanced Lab branch.

All of this would mean that I can still have the totally unified inventory window in my NeoCom, but what I'll use for every-day tasks are these detached sub-inventories with a clearly defined root (and for added new-UI-awesomeness, I can assign these sub-root windows to the NeoCom to give me back an updated version of the current system, with separate station, ship, and remote asset buttons).

Yes, this is fundamentally the idea that's driving my vision of having a main window and “detachable root” objects. I also think that a lot of the problems with the new system is that opening stuff from outside the inventory window changes the content of that window, when chances are that I set up that window to show me exactly what I wanted to see, and this new inventory is something I want to see in addition to what I already have on-screen.

Maybe a quick-fix would be to simply have “open in new window” be the default action any time I access… anything, really, without using the tree view to get to it, just like you say. But I suspect that it's exactly that behaviour (and the need to save the locations of all these additional windows) that they've wanted to move away from…

Yes, this is what I mean by the whole “detachable root” idea, but more intelligibly written.
I should probably read the entire thread and the responses before posting… ehrm… aaaanyway.

Yup. I feel it's a bit of a missed opportunity not to integrate this new UI with the customisation features that the NeoCom offers — being able to assign quick buttons on the NeoCom to directly open specific inventories would mean using every new feature to their fullest, while still letting us customise our user experience to emulate the old system very closely. We get all the new goodness with all the old goodness (because there were actually a few things in the old system that were very nice and handy).

Yes... I didn't quite get the part where they started to extend overview into inventory window. To be honest didn't even test this functionality much because won't never ever be using such thing.

And i playing almost 9 years ago and you playing 1.5.
Smart peoples know when a new changes bring more positive things than bad, but this crap bring more negative things than old one.

I write again this changes same when user changing back his old Total Commander to Windows Explorer.
This is a step back. I'm very happy if you want to click 100 times more than old item manager, but i do not want to receive tenosynovitis.
This new itempanel is horrible with 156789788 submenu and the inventory is jumbled, because all item merged to one place.
Oh yes the panel have filter and searching bar,you want to tell us, but just the idiots want to use more mouse clicks or more typing.