Skip to content
This repository has been archived by the owner on May 11, 2022. It is now read-only.

UX test results - confirm pop-up #24

Closed
SvenMeyer opened this issue Aug 6, 2018 · 1 comment
Closed

UX test results - confirm pop-up #24

SvenMeyer opened this issue Aug 6, 2018 · 1 comment

Comments

@SvenMeyer
Copy link

SvenMeyer commented Aug 6, 2018

With many years of software design and UX experience, I would like to share my finding after testing MetaMask v 4.8.0 (confirm pop-up):

  • "from" and "to" is redundant and confusing. There is one "from" -> "to" (New Recipient) on the top with no additional information , no (part of) address ... nothing

  • Then it shows the amount - in US$! I want to transfer ETH, so I want to see the amount in ETH not in any other (FIAT) currency. The settings allows me to change it to many other currencies (Crypto or FIAT), but not plain ETH !

  • Then another (redundant) section with information "From" and "To" ... with only 4 hex-digits of each address, so it could be pretty easy for an attacker to create another address which has identical 4 hex-digits. Within this user interface you would not see that you may send your ETH to the wrong address.

  • Gas Fee: If you really want to make it user friendly to increase adoption, then there would be an "automatic" default value, with the option slow (cheap), medium, fast (expensive), and expert mode (to specify your amount)

Likely there was the idea to "make it simpler" with the redesign, but in my opinion MetaMask is now ( together with the issues in #23) much more difficult to use and far from a UX experience which helps mass adoption, as (in my opinion) everything was done wrong what could possibly could have been done wrong.

@bdresser
Copy link

bdresser commented Aug 6, 2018

thanks for your feedback @SvenMeyer!

We've made some significant updates to the "confirm" screen which will be rolling out shortly in 4.9.0. See MetaMask/Design#11 for more detail. It addresses your first and third points.

Your second point is a duplicate of MetaMask/metamask-extension#4510

We also have plans to revise the gas controls, making the simple option clearer and giving an advanced view for more technical users. See more details on MetaMask/metamask-extension#4789.

Going to close this issue for now, and I encourage you to chime in on the other relevant issues mentioned. Thanks again for your feedback.

@bdresser bdresser closed this as completed Aug 6, 2018
Sign up for free to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in.
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants