Ok, well at least that’s nice. But in the grid view the groups are so small you basically cant see the language of the conditions
One of the things I miss about the original grid view is being able to see all of the events as soon as I open the page. Maybe adding an option to expand all groups could help.
Like others, I am initially not happy with this change but I believe we can improve it in the long run, especially considering that this change will eventually lead to multiple pathways when using conditionals, which has been a long-requested feature.
All for the new editor but just like the new responsive it takes time to get used to it and then it becomes the norm. Making all apps just swap over to it would be if you had to start only building new responsive elements inside a bubble old responsive app.
When that was rolled out we were able to use the old responsive but all NEW apps were only using the new format. That should be how this was rolled out.
I have many clients with apps developed over the past years and having to now use the new workflow editor makes it much more challenging to maintain them in their current state.
Bubble: Check out the new editor, what do people think!?
Users: We hate it. Everything is worse for experienced bubblers.
Bubble: Great! We’re just going to go ahead and roll it out to everyone then.
UPDATE: After reading their release notes, it gets even better. Bubble’s reason given for the changes was basically ‘you asked for better control over larger, complex apps, and this does that’. In other words, they tried to make an improvement (awesome, yes, thank you for the attempt), they got feedback that it actually made the problem worse, and then their response was to tell users nah, you’re wrong, we think this is better, so therefore it is. If they aren’t gonna act on feedback, wtf are we doing here besides paying a 1,000x markup on AWS?
I’ve been using Bubble for over 5 years, and I have to say this new workflow editor is the single most disappointing update I’ve experienced. It’s not just a matter of adjusting to something new—the user experience genuinely feels like a step backward, making my workflow slower, more complicated, and frustrating.
I’m deeply disappointed that Bubble hasn’t provided an option for users to continue using the previous workflow editor. Long-time users shouldn’t have to battle the very tool they’ve invested so much into mastering.
We need an option to go back or swap between views.
Users read left to right and reducing the amount of information consumed at one time and replacing it with 80% empty white space significantly increases time to build, make updates, and troubleshoot. On top of that, there are design flaws like clicking “edit workflow” on an element with multiple conditional actions no longer lists those actions next to each other, leaving me to scroll and hover over action titles to figure out which I’m looking for.
I’m all for new experiences that are superior in nature, but I’m struggling to understand the benefits here.
My question for bubble and the community that might be able to help us overcome initial reactions:
What are the benefits of this new experience?
I miss being able to hit the DELETE button to delete actions.
why does double tapping the folder trigger a renaming workflow.
i double tap because i want to open the folder and view my stuff. i literally never rename my folders after naming them in the first place.
it should not be this hard to open folders. i hate having to find and click on the tiny icon
Here is my takes
issue checker off-on no difference
· Clicking an element takes 8 seconds to forward to workflow editor ( 730 wf element page )
· Clicking an element takes 5 secs to forward to wf editor (330 wf elements page)
· Clicking an element takes 3-4 secs to forward to wf editor (260 wf elements page)
· Clicking an element takes 1 secs to forward to wf editor (<50 wf elements page)
Previously max 1 seconds, so basically Bubble team proves they don’t have any complex apps or bad computers to test on
So basically, the team lead, or whoever the decision maker, that goes against the current of the powerful Bubble community, inferred that there is no apps that have 50+ wf elements in a page ?
- Reveal element from wf action doesn’t work when child of that wf is clicked, which is very very bad
I have to admit I’m really struggling to work efficiently with this new interface, even though I tried it several times during the beta phase…
One interesting compromise to the complete lack of global visibility in the new UI would be to display, on the right side, all the workflows within a folder when you click on it_ (this was one of the strong points of the previous interface).
Honestly, I find it quite hard to understand why this isn’t already the case…
What’s going on here?
I’m actually laughing out loud at the fact that clicking on a workflow folder does nothing. That’s too funny.
You have to click on this 5px chevron to expand it.
I feel like this was designed for aliens.
The solution is to not let users “toggle between views.” That’s impossible to maintain. The solution is to fix the new workflow editor by either making it horizontal as in unreal engine and every other visual development software or to enable free placement like in lucidchart etc.
@fede.bubble it has introduced significant bugs into the system
I have submitted an email bug report to the team around this. I have not wasted any more of my own time to investigate it further but my experience is such that I’d imagine that if every single input element tied into a workflow action to modify data is shown as missing (despite never altered and still on reusable), this likely would be affecting every single action for data actions that need input elements.
I’ve posted a few very specific points, but I should also mention that I think there is something very wrong at a systemic level, and I’ll use the below post to demonstrate it.
It is very clear that either the data pipeline is completely broken or we’re measuring disengaged users who do not use the product as a proxy for the ground truth. This is going to lead all of us down a very wrong path.
34,000 apps opted in and 8% of them then opted out. This likely means that 92% of the 34,000 apps were created to test it, and then left abandoned, while 8% opted in on an app already in development or production and then opted out. That would be my assumption based on anecdotal evidence.
This is a really good take, this take is so good. Creating new app to test it my hyptohesis can be around 50-60%
