Biggy2872 Posted March 7, 2009 Share Posted March 7, 2009 bjp999, You might like the following screen shot too. It is a work in progress, but I'm porting unmenu.awk to work as an "extension" under unRAID-Web. I've gotten the basic screens for each plug-in to work, but do not yet have their links and buttons working. (I've made NO changes to any of the unmenu plug-in files. My "php" code is dynamically defining the "Tabs" in the interface and then using the plug-in files in the "unmenu" directory. It is a real challenge to me, as "php" is a new language for me. (I'm still forgetting to put the semicolon at the ends of lines on occasion) Note that this example does not use the "awk" web-server at all, but instead uses lighttpd, the web-server BubbaQ has built into the unRADI-Web interface. You can see the "debugging" line above the plug-in showing the variables I use when invoking the specific plug-in. The 404-not found at the bottom is because the current code in the plugin is looking to open a "sys_log_tail" web-pageto display the end of the syslog, but no such "php" web-page exists. When (if) I get this working, you should be able to use the existing plug-ins under this new web-interface. You will not need to start the unmenu web-server at all and we can continue unMENU plug-in development using shell and awk as you desire, until such time that "php" equivalents are written. Joe L. Very nice! I hope it works out.. I'm still working on the boot script manager (time has been tight the last month or so, and i've needed to re-write/write some bash scripts used for booting) and was hoping that someone could get the unMENU plugins working in this new interface so that I could make the switch to php AFTER I finish my WIP in awk. Cheers, Matt PS, I wish I had more time now to help out with this project... In about a months time I will have much more time to contribute... Excellent work everyone! Quote Link to comment
bubbaQ Posted March 7, 2009 Author Share Posted March 7, 2009 One big point. Round corners and shadows are a BITCH in dynamic content.... I't like to avoid them in therms. They are ok on static content like buttons and the headings. I want to see indicators on the overview, so at one glance, I know if I need to investigate something more.... and then click to investigate How about lose the serial number (that's used in investigations, not judging status), move the thermo to the left and make about 20% shorter, and put the text under the thermometer closer to the thermometer. Make the disk icon about 30% smaller, and the box around the temp about 20% smaller. Get rid of the green dot, and we can color-code the disk icon for the same info. Make the device column smaller. Move monitoring status and disk space to the right-hand side and stacked. Then see how many drives will fit. Quote Link to comment
dhy8386 Posted March 7, 2009 Share Posted March 7, 2009 Will do. Keep in mind that while i wish i could code this myself, i am just mocking it up in photoshop. Should be a decent proxy for the webpage but nonetheless... Once we find a good format, I can provide the disk icons and any other ones that we want to create... Quote Link to comment
NAS Posted March 7, 2009 Share Posted March 7, 2009 Can I also suggest that some sort of inherent RSS functionality/modular design would be nice. Always thought of RSS as the poor cousin of email alerts but so easy to use. Quote Link to comment
dhy8386 Posted March 7, 2009 Share Posted March 7, 2009 One big point. Round corners and shadows are a BITCH in dynamic content.... I't like to avoid them in therms. They are ok on static content like buttons and the headings. I want to see indicators on the overview, so at one glance, I know if I need to investigate something more.... and then click to investigate How about lose the serial number (that's used in investigations, not judging status), move the thermo to the left and make about 20% shorter, and put the text under the thermometer closer to the thermometer. Make the disk icon about 30% smaller, and the box around the temp about 20% smaller. Get rid of the green dot, and we can color-code the disk icon for the same info. Make the device column smaller. Move monitoring status and disk space to the right-hand side and stacked. Then see how many drives will fit. OK. Here are suggested changes. Added color icons to disk to denote status. Notice two "blue" disks at bottom for unknown disks. Got rid of serial and shrunk everything else. Also moved columns closer together. Also got rid of harsh colors on the therms and just using the cool blue and red when close to full. Got rid of circular rectangles and drop shadows. Lastly, moved disk space and disk monitoring to the right and stacked. Using the same real estate as before, was able to fit alot more disks. 14 in total. Let me know your thoughts..... Quote Link to comment
NLS Posted March 7, 2009 Share Posted March 7, 2009 Looks great except that I really doubt people will notice the color difference of the disks. Maybe the whole graphic should reflect the status. Either color it all (yes I know) or also change the icon used (for example put a "?" on top of unknown disks). Quote Link to comment
NAS Posted March 7, 2009 Share Posted March 7, 2009 Some more general comments. I count 9 ish colours. Really think that takes away from the overall feel. Colour for exceptions not the norm is my moto. Style is great but its gawdy with all those colours. The drive image/icon... unless there are going to be lots of different ones I cant see it adding to much value. What might be better is a set of icons based on manufactures logos. That adds variety and value. I like how your going wider rather than longer. Id like see blank items for uninstalled drives since theres a OS limit to the amount. i.e. there one greyed out bay free in my NAS. Personally i dont like the inclusion of "unRAID original" in this project. Having them completely separate entity's is more logical to me. This also leaves the possibility of read only setting which unRAID is lacking in. Quote Link to comment
prostuff1 Posted March 7, 2009 Share Posted March 7, 2009 Looks great except that I really doubt people will notice the color difference of the disks. Maybe the whole graphic should reflect the status. Either color it all (yes I know) or also change the icon used (for example put a "?" on top of unknown disks). Agree on this. It is kinda hard to see the colors at first glance. Perhaps a dropshadow/outer glow that goes all the way around the drive that reflects the color. The color would obviously represent the sate of the drive. Quote Link to comment
dhy8386 Posted March 7, 2009 Share Posted March 7, 2009 Some more general comments. I count 9 ish colours. Really think that takes away from the overall feel. Colour for exceptions not the norm is my moto. Style is great but its gawdy with all those colours. I agree colors should be used wisely. I think part of what you see here is that I am using different thermo colors than bubba since this is just a mock up. Id probably match those. Also, the temp colors are useful cause the draw instant attention to a problem but should not be there if your drives are running cool. The drive image/icon... unless there are going to be lots of different ones I cant see it adding to much value. What might be better is a set of icons based on manufactures logos. That adds variety and value. The drive icons help to make the interface more "webby" and attractive and less table-like. I tried to add a slight unRAID flavor here by adding the lime to the drives. I would envision them being functional as they would be color coded for status as well as clickable to see the contents of each drive. I see maybe putting manufacturers logos on the info pages but not on the overview page. But I am open to suggestions and frankly since I am not coding it, its more up to Bubba. Im just happy to make whatever set of custom icons we all decide makes sense. Personally i dont like the inclusion of "unRAID original" in this project. Having them completely separate entity's is more logical to me. This also leaves the possibility of read only setting which unRAID is lacking in. Yeh maybe as an extension but not part of the main interface. Quote Link to comment
bubbaQ Posted March 7, 2009 Author Share Posted March 7, 2009 The unRAID original needs to be there, because EVERY function of it is not going to be possible (at least for a long time) ... unless Tom exposes them in a published API. Make the disk status indicator more prominent like this: Quote Link to comment
bubbaQ Posted March 8, 2009 Author Share Posted March 8, 2009 What might be better is a set of icons based on manufactures logos I'm actually working on that in the drive detail window. The recent Seagate firmware fisasco makes it necessary to ID the manufacturer of a drive, so I can do links to the manufacturer's site, to Google the drive model, firmware, etc. Now that I have good code for parsing hierarchical config (.ini) files, I can do more with manufacturer-specific and model-specific, and even drive-specific config parameters.... and tie those in with smarthistory too. Quote Link to comment
Joe L. Posted March 8, 2009 Share Posted March 8, 2009 The unRAID original needs to be there, because EVERY function of it is not going to be possible (at least for a long time) ... unless Tom exposes them in a published API. Make the disk status indicator more prominent like this: I like the "indicators" as illustrated. They also make it FAR easier on us who assist with forum posts from users who say the "indicator" is "red/blue/green/grey/orange" As much as we change the interface, please keep the error indicator colors consistent... The improved graphic for disk status is great. I really like them. As far as the added information. From a human factors perspective horizontal scrolling should not be required to see critical information. Nor should vertical scrolling. Any abnormal status should be clearly visible without ANY scrolling. (It is OK to scroll to see further detail, once you know something is abnormal.) For us with a lot of drives it will be impossible to see all the drives without scrolling, especially if you use multiple lines per drive. It will be even more difficult if you include drives not-yet assigned to the array as unMENU currently does on the main page. (they could of course be easily put on a different page, perhaps combined with the devices page, showing the assigned drives as a group, and the un-assigned drives below.) Joe L. Quote Link to comment
Biggy2872 Posted March 8, 2009 Share Posted March 8, 2009 (they could of course be easily put on a different page, perhaps combined with the devices page, showing the assigned drives as a group, and the un-assigned drives below.) Joe L. I agree with this.. the overview page should only have the assigned drives listed. Another devices page could then show the number of drive slots and show which are assigned and which are not. (maybe even be able to tell which version of the key you have and show only the correct number of slots & cache if they are available with that key. if this is even possible) Chers, Matt Quote Link to comment
bubbaQ Posted March 8, 2009 Author Share Posted March 8, 2009 As much as we change the interface, please keep the error indicator colors consistent... I second that. As far as the added information. From a human factors perspective horizontal scrolling should not be required to see critical information. Nor should vertical scrolling. Any abnormal status should be clearly visible without ANY scrolling. (It is OK to scroll to see further detail, once you know something is abnormal.) Agree 100%. Quote Link to comment
NAS Posted March 8, 2009 Share Posted March 8, 2009 The unRAID original needs to be there, because EVERY function of it is not going to be possible (at least for a long time) ... unless Tom exposes them in a published API. Make the disk status indicator more prominent like this: I see the logic to that. It is purely personal preference that I would prefer to have to launch the official GUI to see the official GUI. I think there to much duplication including it in an iframe. Even it it opened in a new window would be better. I am perhaps being anal but i like the diea of this project being seperate and not mixing the water. What might be better is a set of icons based on manufactures logos I'm actually working on that in the drive detail window. The recent Seagate firmware fisasco makes it necessary to ID the manufacturer of a drive, so I can do links to the manufacturer's site, to Google the drive model, firmware, etc. Now that I have good code for parsing hierarchical config (.ini) files, I can do more with manufacturer-specific and model-specific, and even drive-specific config parameters.... and tie those in with smarthistory too. hdtemp can help with a maintained dbase of serial > manufacturer but Ive always though we could do better in that regard. All we need is a easy way to report all the info requred should the drive not be identified and the community will do the rest. I am happy to help with organsing this bit if it helps Quote Link to comment
NLS Posted March 8, 2009 Share Posted March 8, 2009 *** DO NOT use pop-up windows, many people plain hate them (me included), most browsers block them (some silently) and it's calling for trouble... plus REMOVES from the consistency an interface should have *** *** Scrolling up down is much more normal than scrolling sideways... It has ALWAYS been like that, from the console days. I agree if possible, no scrolling at all (after all we know the drive limit of unRAID), but if scrolling has to be there, it has to be vertical *** Thank you for your attention. Of course you need to decide what you consider "basic resolution" (to not have scrolling)... used to be 640x480, but for browsers it never was below 800x600, although I can see 1024x768 being the norm "minimum" right now (although the new super-mini laptops, have messed with this... again... read: 800x480). BTW, I love the idea of the possibility for a click to take us to the manufacturer site and if possible the correct section for the model... It probably adds to the complexity though, plus it cannot be stable "for ever" (since vendors change their pages). It is also the only thing that I would expect in a separate window (or tab)... Since you shouldn't move away from the main interface. Quote Link to comment
NAS Posted March 8, 2009 Share Posted March 8, 2009 If open in a new window isnt viable then can i suggest a selectable option to remove the official unRAID tab for those of us who dont want to see it here Also im not sure im to keen on being taken to a manufacturers page direct from the config page i.e. you no longer see the config page. Thats where "open in new window" comes into its own. This is a prefence thing again but I also dont like web servers having my internal server or ip name in their logs. Probably cant be avoided though. My screen resolution is 1920x1200. I understand that we have to accommodate a wide user base but the trick is accommodating the majority. I think it likely the majority will be able to handle 1024x768 or even more but thats just a guess. Or put another way the majority of users should not have to scroll down when half their screens horizontal real estate is empty just to accomodate a minority of users on ancient hardware. Tricky one Quote Link to comment
NLS Posted March 8, 2009 Share Posted March 8, 2009 Mini laptops are not ancient hardware. They are cutting edge. But they are 800x480. Anyway, from my talks with pro web designers, the norm for page design today is to be ok at 1024x768. If you ask me, it should be PERFECT at 1024x768 and usable at less (800x600 or even 800x480... of course with scrolling - but remember preferably vertical). It would be great if my 640x480 (and mostly 480x640) WM device was compatible too... Quote Link to comment
NAS Posted March 8, 2009 Share Posted March 8, 2009 Agreed they are not ancient but they will be in the minority. Im easy, all im saying is on my 24" monitor its bloody annoying to have to scroll down when 50%+ of the screen is empty. I do not think it is unreasonable that people choosing to access the page from a low resolution device have to scroll to allow for the majority (guess) to be able to see everything on a single screen. I dont think theres a right and wrong answer here and im sure Bubba will have a strong opinion and thats the way it will happen Quote Link to comment
NLS Posted March 8, 2009 Share Posted March 8, 2009 But I don't think we say anything different. Quote Link to comment
bubbaQ Posted March 8, 2009 Author Share Posted March 8, 2009 *** DO NOT use pop-up windows, many people plain hate them (me included), most browsers block them (some silently) and it's calling for trouble... plus REMOVES from the consistency an interface should have *** Popups are a tool -- and the right thing to do in the right situation. 1) they allow you to see more information without losing any of the old information. 2) they allow embarking on an inquiry thread, without losing your starting point. I like popups in such situations, and I'm going to use them in my code. Either new windows, or divs. All decent popup blocking software does not block a popup that is a direct result of a user click, and they have the ability to whitelist a source... so whitelist the unRAID server. *** Scrolling up down is much more normal than scrolling sideways... It has ALWAYS been like that, from the console days. I agree if possible, no scrolling at all (after all we know the drive limit of unRAID), but if scrolling has to be there, it has to be vertical *** Agreed. Of course you need to decide what you consider "basic resolution" (to not have scrolling)... used to be 640x480, but for browsers it never was below 800x600, although I can see 1024x768 being the norm "minimum" right now (although the new super-mini laptops, have messed with this... again... read: 800x480). My monitor is 2600x1600, and 200dpi. A number of websites and applications look hosed on my system. Some are even BROKEN. That is why I try to do ALL resolution handling in ems, and not pixels (other than a few elements like border-widths). For commands that will not allow ems, I convert ems to pixels on-the-fly. Ems translate better for different dpi settings. They also give much better results when zooming. This also works well for people with non-default settings for fonts in their browser. (My default is 22pt for example) Quote Link to comment
SSD Posted March 8, 2009 Share Posted March 8, 2009 I know the goal of this is to run on a completely stock unRAID install. I am running 4.3.3 at the moment, and just tried installing after a fresh reboot. The following is the result of the installpkg ... Installing package unraidweb-0.0.7-i386-bubba... PACKAGE DESCRIPTION: unraidweb: unRAID-Web is a web server plus PHP, customized for unRAID unraidweb: unraidweb: It consists of: unraidweb: - lighttpd 1.4.19 (light web server) unraidweb: - php 5.2.8 (scripting language) unraidweb: - Gamin 0.1.9 (FAM) unraidweb: - libXML2 2.6.32 unraidweb: - lighttpd and php config files on the flash (/boot/config/) unraidweb: unraidweb: unraidweb: Package Created By: BubbaQ Executing install script for unraidweb-0.0.7-i386-bubba... rm: cannot remove `/boot/config/lighttpd/extensions/ur/*': No such file or directory rmdir: /boot/config/lighttpd/extensions/ur: No such file or directory unRAID emhttp is running on port 80 install/doinst.sh: line 92: /boot/config/lighttpd/lighttpdctrl: Permission denied Lighttpd did not start. You will need to edit the lighttpd.conf file and configure it Not surprsingly, the web server is not active. I ran a "chmod +x /boot/config/lighttpd/lighttpdctr" and then ran "lighttpdctrl start" and it came up. Thought I should report. Quote Link to comment
dhy8386 Posted March 8, 2009 Share Posted March 8, 2009 Here are a few different HD icon sets (2 posts). Tried two with the "lime" theme and two without. One with a different indicator placement. Let me know thoughts Quote Link to comment
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.