nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Which UI?

mike_s

We are in the process of preparing to upgrade from TeamSite 5.5.2 to 6.5 and one of the issues currently under review is which UI to use.

The team responsible for training/support would like to standardise on a common user interface but have not as yet made a decision whether to use CC Standard or CC Professional. The reason for wanting to standardise on a common user interface is based on wanting to simplify training and support issues.

As a developer of several years I much prefer the Professional UI, but I can see that less technical users/new users may get on better with the Standard interface.

I would very much appreciate comments from anyone with experiences (good or bad) of using either interface. Are there any serious limitations that anyone has become aware of? Has anyone had reason to change from using one UI to another for any reason?

Many thanks in advance.

Mike
Interwoven Developer

Find more posts tagged with

Comments

Migrateduser

Mike,

I tend to think that the CCPro interface is very kind to non-technical users, as well. While one could customize the "standard" interface to a greater extent, CCPro includes the Windows explorer-like interface which should be intuitive to anyone with some decent experience with a computer. Also, one probably wouldn't need to interact too heavily with the job/task tab, as their workflow might include CCI links that they could just click on to perform their job. Another strong advantage is that CCStd is not acceptable for the developers and using it would cause someone to have to support both interfaces, which adds $$. So, I'd suggest to train them on the professional interface and get them used to it. I personally don't think it's that unfriendly -- just something with which to get acquainted.

Dave

Current Environments:
(1,2) TS 6.5 on W2K3
(3) Vignette V7 Portal on Solaris 9

Jamik

Mike,

We've done some tests too with our 6.1 implementation of Teamsite and found that CCStd has much slower performance than CCPro. So if performance is also a factor then I'd suggest going CCPro since it's much quicker for users.

smenon

Mike..

The choice of UI is driven primarily by the nature of your user population and their expectations. Contrary to what Dave and Jamik state, I would personally recommend CC Std for business users because we have found that most business users tend to adapt to that interface much more easily than CC Pro. However, the response from your business users might be different. The best way to determine that is to probably show both UIs to a small representative sub-set of your current users and see which one they prefer. As much as I agree that sometimes as developers you prefer to work with and customize the CC Pro UI, I believe that you need to provide your content contributors the UI that they can be most productive with. If that happens to be CC Pro - so be it, but ultimately I think they need to pick.

While I agree that CC Std did have one or two performance issues in the earlier versions, I believe that most (if not all) have been addressed in 6.1 SP2 and in 6.5 (and later).

thanks

--Sunil Menon
Sr. Product Manager
Interwoven, Inc.

Bill Klish

We are using TeamSite 6.1 at my client and actually use both interfaces. We have trained all content entry users (non-technical) on the CC Standard interface while most of our development staff uses CC Professional.

Bear in mind that these users where not used to the prior interface found in TeamSite 4.x and 5.x. The majority of them are using TeamSite for the first time. However, those that had used it before quickly adapted to the CC Standard interface and agreed it is much more efficient to get things done.

Jamik

Performance may have been improved some with 6.5 but none-the-less it's something he should test for himself on their systems. We get constant complaints from our business users that performance is slow and I see it too and our mercury tools have shown a great decline in performance between CCstd and CCpro, but like I said that was on version 6.1. I'm finishing up installing 6.5 on a brand new box and I'll be rerunning our same scripts on the new box and we'll see how CCstd does. Performance is a big issue since if it's slow the users won't use it. Also if we find performance still to be unacceptible in 6.5 we'll go with having our European users use CCpro as that is much faster.

Also Sunil I posted in another thread hopefully you'll see this one(if not oh well it'll make it into the suggestion bucket eventually). Is Interwoven going to integrate gzip into your installation of apache in 6.7? or in any new teamsite service packs? That would greatly help performance as far as lowering amount of data being transmitted over the lines. I've done some fooling around with it on our dev environment and it lowered the size of the home page of CCstd from 350k down to 19k.