- Yes (move to same level)
- No (keep the current implementation)
0
voters
Having 2 buttons with almost the exact same text right next to each other is a recipe for mis-clicks. Especially when the action is happening invisibly and the user would have no idea that they had mis-clicked, I donât think thatâs a good idea.
3 Likes
I think that needs considering. here is how it looks with the evaluate option enabled.
Alternatively:
(Edit: Maybe not, it is an obscure option)
3 Likes
I submitted a translation to correct Optimise to Optimise Current Preset. Hopefully that will make this easier to visualise 
for all our en-GB folks.
I find myself wondering â and this is probably a question for @Expertium â what is the problem that this is trying to fix? 
Is there an issue with the buttons taking up too much vertical space in Options? That seems like it would only be an issue on small screens, and on the phones Iâve checked, these buttons wonât even fit together on 1 line due to the length of the text.
3 Likes
Itâs trying to fix the âcurrent implementation looks uglyâ problem
I think there should be a single button Optimize which opens a dialog message with a checkbox Optimize all presets, a Cancel button, and an OK button.
Maybe do another checkbox with âonly this presetâ next to an âOptimiseâ button. Thoughts?
Checkbox is a terrible idea. It creates confusion and inconvenience for those who only use âOptimiseâ (and not âOptimise All Presets").
âOptimiseâ (only a single preset) should be the default because it doesnât produce âside effectsâ so to speak.
If you are considering making checkbox behavior, then it should be another way around: âOptimiseâ is a standalone button, and âOptimize All Presetsâ is a checkbox.
â
I, however, have the same opinion as Danika: nothing should be changed.
You are trying to polish something that doesnât need polishing.
@Danika_Dakika this should prevent misclicks. Thoughts?
1 Like
The toggle can be on by default, just like we do for health check.
IMO, it looks really bad. I donât know, we already have 2 toggles, adding another doesnât sound that bad to me.
This will look different on mobile devices.
To prevent accidental clicks, you can display a âAre you sure?â window.
1 Like
Aside from there still being no user-focused reason to make a change at all âŚ
This seems wrong to me from a right-handed-design/right-thumb/mouse-user perspective. When there are right-aligned buttons in a UI, those are usually primary, arenât they? Even though the other buttons in this section are left-aligned, it still seems like right-aligning this one gives it prominence â lined up so nicely right under those switches.
The text of the main button will be longer than what you have in that image â âOptimiz[s]e Current Preset.â And even if you left/right-align the buttons, they will start to look just like side-by-side buttons as the screen/window gets smaller â until eventually there isnât room to have them on the same line at all.
1 Like
What side effects am I unaware of?
Dae said âNopeâ to this change
Side effects in the sense that single preset optimization does only what you expect: it optimizes only selected preset.
Optimize All Presets, on the other hand, produces side effects: it optimizes all presets in your collection (not only the preset you selected).
I hope you understand the logic.
Oh ok. I mean, when I click a button that says âOptimize All Presetsâ and then it optimizes all the presets, I donât think of that as a side effect. Itâs doing what I expect. But now I see what thinking your logic was based on.
It was an argument as to why âOptimize All Presetsâ should not be the default behavior (because it produces side effects in the form of optimization of the other presets you havenât selected)
Not trying to argue/change your mind, but Iâm curious why you do them individually? Seems like most people, most of the time, would be optimizing all, because the rule of thumb is to optimize each at least once a month. Why not just knock it all out with the click of a single button?