Update setting on Windows should indicate that it is installation-specific

VERIFIED FIXED in Firefox 66

Status

()

enhancement
P1
normal
VERIFIED FIXED
6 months ago
3 months ago

People

(Reporter: bytesized, Assigned: bytesized)

Tracking

unspecified
Firefox 66
Unspecified
Windows
Points:
---
Dependency tree / graph

Firefox Tracking Flags

(firefox66 verified, firefox67 verified)

Details

Attachments

(3 attachments, 12 obsolete attachments)

47 bytes, text/x-phabricator-request
Details | Review
57.83 KB, image/png
Details
133.85 KB, image/png
Details
Bug 1458308 changed the way that the Update settings are stored on Windows. When a user selects "Automatically install updates" or "Check for updates but let you choose to install them", that value is stored in an installation-specific manner, not a user-specific manner. However, there is currently no visible indication that this is how it will work.

This could be confusing to users. We should add some text explaining this.
Jim - I'd like to get some UX attention on this bug. Do you know someone who might be able to help out with this?
Flags: needinfo?(jmathies)

Comment 2

5 months ago
Are we shipping this behavior with 65? Merge day is today, and we won't be able to add strings to that release anymore, meaning we likely can't fix this for 65, which is unfortunate... Please can you prioritize finding someone (maybe :amylee ?) so we can at least fix this in 66?
Flags: needinfo?(ksteuber)
Priority: -- → P1
This is indeed being shipped in 65. I'm afraid, however, that regardless of priority, I do not know how to find someone to fix this. That is why I asked Jim to find someone.

In fact, I have been trying to get someone to fix the error string for this same change since Bug 1458308 Comment 15, 4 months ago, and have had no luck whatsoever. (I have since moved that work to Bug 1503341, by the way)

Since you suggested :amylee, I will redirect this needinfo to them.
Flags: needinfo?(ksteuber) → needinfo?(amlee)
(In reply to Kirk Steuber (he/him) [:bytesized] from comment #3)
> This is indeed being shipped in 65. I'm afraid, however, that regardless of
> priority, I do not know how to find someone to fix this. That is why I asked
> Jim to find someone.
> 
> In fact, I have been trying to get someone to fix the error string for this
> same change since Bug 1458308 Comment 15, 4 months ago, and have had no luck
> whatsoever. (I have since moved that work to Bug 1503341, by the way)
> 
> Since you suggested :amylee, I will redirect this needinfo to them.

Hi, 

If this is specifically a string fix, I would suggest redirecting this to Meridel.
Flags: needinfo?(amlee) → needinfo?(mwalkington)

Comment 5

5 months ago
Hi Kirk,

What is the deadline for the new string, please?

And, I think we should set a quick Vidyo meeting so I can walk through this with you.
Flags: needinfo?(mwalkington) → needinfo?(ksteuber)
I think that it is too late to have this string in for 65, so anytime before 66 merges should be fine.

I would be happy to discuss it on Vidyo, if you would like. I am free all day today, if you are available.
Flags: needinfo?(ksteuber)
It looks like I have the help that I needed on this, so cancelling the needinfo on :jimm.
Flags: needinfo?(jmathies)

Comment 8

5 months ago

Comment 9

5 months ago
We (ksteuber@mozilla.com, @amlee@mozilla.com, myself) discussed and considered several UX options of varying disruption to the user. Since this change impacts a relatively small amount of users, but those impacted will have difficulty addressing the inconvenience caused, I propose the attached string, but making it red to call better attention to it. 

Here is the string: "Settings will apply to all Windows accounts and Firefox profiles using this installation of Firefox." See attachment for placement.

I'm afraid that I may have made a small oversight when giving my feedback.

I did not notice that the "Automatically update search engines" option was in the scope of the mock-up. That option is actually not affected by this change.

Given that, perhaps "Settings" should be changed to "This setting". I was thinking that multiple settings were affected by this change, because there is a second setting that I am working on that will work the same way. But since it is not ready yet, there is currently just the one setting.

What do you think of "This setting will apply to all Windows accounts and Firefox profiles using this installation of Firefox."? I'll attach an image of what the changed placement would look like.

Flags: needinfo?(mwalkington)
Posted image possible message placement.png (obsolete) —

Comment 12

4 months ago
Posted image additional line break.png (obsolete) —
Flags: needinfo?(mwalkington)

Comment 13

4 months ago

Hm, that could work if we adjust the spacing a bit. Right now, it's not clear if the new string applies to the settings below or beneath it.

See attachment for indication of where we need an additional space for clarity. If that looks funky and isn't clear, I'll need to re-work the content here.

Posted image message candidate.PNG (obsolete) —

The last image that I posted was more of a mock-up, but I have written the patch for this one. I gave the text element a bottom margin of 0.5em.

What do you think?

Attachment #9033788 - Attachment is obsolete: true
Attachment #9034782 - Attachment is obsolete: true
Attachment #9034816 - Attachment is obsolete: true
Flags: needinfo?(mwalkington)

Comment 15

4 months ago
Posted image Prefs banner formatting example.png (obsolete) —

I think the placement and copy works. I think we should probably not use the red after all — it looks too much like an error input message. Can we consider instead a banner like the attached?

Flags: needinfo?(mwalkington)
Posted image message candidate (old icon).PNG (obsolete) —

Alright, what do you think of this one?

Attachment #9034869 - Attachment is obsolete: true
Flags: needinfo?(mwalkington)

Comment 17

4 months ago

I like it! Thank you.

Flags: needinfo?(mwalkington)
Assignee

Updated

4 months ago
Assignee: nobody → ksteuber
Assignee

Updated

4 months ago
Attachment #9034908 - Attachment is obsolete: true
Attachment #9035153 - Attachment description: Bug 1512302 - Indicate on Windows that the App Update setting is installation-specific r=jaws → Bug 1512302 - Indicate on Windows that the App Update setting is installation-specific r=jaws,flod
Assignee

Updated

4 months ago
Attachment #9035096 - Attachment filename: message candidate.PNG → message candidate (old icon).PNG
Posted image message candidate (new icon).PNG (obsolete) —

It was requested that I use a slightly different icon for this, so I have uploaded a screenshot showing it. Does it look ok?

Flags: needinfo?(mwalkington)
Assignee

Updated

4 months ago
Attachment #9035096 - Attachment description: message candidate.PNG → message candidate (old icon).PNG

Comment 20

4 months ago

Redirecting icon review to Amy.

Flags: needinfo?(mwalkington) → needinfo?(amlee)

Hi, I provided feedback in the attached screenshot. Please let me know if you have questions. Thanks!

Flags: needinfo?(amlee)
Posted image message candidate.png (obsolete) —

I have updated the design. How does it look?

Attachment #9035096 - Attachment is obsolete: true
Attachment #9035807 - Attachment is obsolete: true
Attachment #9036638 - Attachment is obsolete: true
Flags: needinfo?(amlee)

Can you give the same amount of spacing at the top of the banner compared to the bottom?

Flags: needinfo?(amlee)

I was asked to add the bottom spacing in Comment 13 to make it more clear which setting the banner applies to. I can easily add such spacing, but don't we want to group it with the above setting?

Flags: needinfo?(amlee)

(In reply to Kirk Steuber (he/him) [:bytesized] from comment #22)

Created attachment 9036703 [details]
message candidate.png

I have updated the design. How does it look?

(In reply to Kirk Steuber (he/him) [:bytesized] from comment #24)

I was asked to add the bottom spacing in Comment 13 to make it more clear which setting the banner applies to. I can easily add such spacing, but don't we want to group it with the above setting?

Hi,

That makes sense. The spacing looks tight up top. Can we move this 10px down? This still gives more spacing at the bottom so it still looks like it belongs to the radio buttons above.

Flags: needinfo?(amlee)
Posted image message candidate.png (obsolete) —

This is with 10px of upper margin. What do you think? Personally, I think it makes it too ambiguous as to which setting the warning applies to.

Given how much trouble we are having with the details, would you be interested in a Vidyo screen-sharing session so that we can iterate rapidly rather than making one adjustment per day?

Attachment #9036703 - Attachment is obsolete: true
Attachment #9036741 - Attachment is obsolete: true
Flags: needinfo?(amlee)

(In reply to Kirk Steuber (he/him) [:bytesized] from comment #26)

Created attachment 9037018 [details]
message candidate.png

This is with 10px of upper margin. What do you think? Personally, I think it makes it too ambiguous as to which setting the warning applies to.

Given how much trouble we are having with the details, would you be interested in a Vidyo screen-sharing session so that we can iterate rapidly rather than making one adjustment per day?

Sure feel free to ping me on slack.

Flags: needinfo?(amlee)
Posted image message candidate.png (obsolete) —

This is how the message looks after making the changes that we discussed on Vidyo. Could you please confirm that this is how it ought to look so that I can commit the changes? Thanks!

Attachment #9037018 - Attachment is obsolete: true
Flags: needinfo?(amlee)

(In reply to Kirk Steuber (he/him) [:bytesized] from comment #28)

Created attachment 9038295 [details]
message candidate.png

This is how the message looks after making the changes that we discussed on Vidyo. Could you please confirm that this is how it ought to look so that I can commit the changes? Thanks!

Looks good. Thanks

Flags: needinfo?(amlee)
Comment on attachment 9038295 [details]
message candidate.png

Quick drive by. The indentation of the informational text makes it look like it only applies to the one immediately above it just as a sub-option would if it were a checkbox.

As UX, I believe that you have the final say here. What do you think about Comment 30?

Flags: needinfo?(amlee)
Posted image spec.png

Hi Kirk,

Can you implement it so the grey box covers the entire section and remove the indenting of the warning (See spec).

Thanks

Flags: needinfo?(amlee)

I did my best to exactly duplicate the spec image and this is the result. How does it look?

Attachment #9038295 - Attachment is obsolete: true
Flags: needinfo?(amlee)
Comment on attachment 9038295 [details]
message candidate.png

Looks good. Thanks!
Flags: needinfo?(amlee)
Attachment #9038295 - Flags: review+

Comment 35

4 months ago
Pushed by ksteuber@mozilla.com:
https://hg.mozilla.org/integration/autoland/rev/84c61304b73d
Indicate on Windows that the App Update setting is installation-specific r=jaws,flod

Comment 36

4 months ago
bugherder
Status: NEW → RESOLVED
Last Resolved: 4 months ago
Resolution: --- → FIXED
Target Milestone: --- → Firefox 66
Assignee

Updated

3 months ago
Depends on: 1526475
Assignee

Updated

3 months ago
No longer depends on: 1526475

This issue is verified fixed using Firefox 66.0b13 (BuildId:20190304101322) and Firefox 67.0a1 (BuildId:20190306095759) on Windows 10 64bit and Windows 7 64bit

Status: RESOLVED → VERIFIED
Flags: qe-verify+
You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.