Improve participants UI: active and inactive users

Hi,
It’s my first contact with this forum and hope I don’t make any formal mistakes.

I’m no designer. However, I made this image within Impress to demonstrate two improvements I would propose:

As you can maybe see, the modified version on the right hand side offers a much better UX related to quickly see whose (video or) mic is open (or not) and who is currently speaking (the user “P N”). Two things I can hardly notice in the current version we are using (which version number I can not find in the web interface).

It’d improve meeting management to me, if you could include any improvement here.

Thanks!

5 Likes

nice feature :+1:

@novoid It’s an amazing suggestion. A much cleaner approach to differentiate between the Participants with their mic and video on/off.

CC: @Freddie WDYT?

I agree. This is neat and useful.
The focus indicator already handles the 2nd part though - blue line around thumbnail of dominant speaker.

There is an indicator already? I would propose to highlight/invert(?) the mic-icon of all people talking so that this important visualization is not hidden behind the poor contrast between black and blue of a thin line I actually never recognized.

The indicator is on the thumbnail, not in the participants pane. It shows up as a distinct blue border around the dominant speaker. The participants pane is a new addition, I imagine there will be improvements to it with new iterations. But the dominant speaker icon is much more prominent and distinguishable.

Oh I see. Yes, the blue indicator in the thumbnail area is noticeable although not that prominent as I would love to. It’s still hard to grasp because of the poor contrast (black/blue). Furthermore, if there are enough participants, the thumbnail might be out of the current view point, losing the ability to recognize the speaker.

I think this will be a concern regardless of how it’s implemented. In the participant pane, if there are a lot of people, the indicator will be hard to see also; you would need to scroll through. The focus indicator is actually very prominent and perhaps easier to notice even. The background color can always be changed for better contrast. Again, this is already possible and depends on the person’s preference.

@novoid
perfect designer!
:+1: :+1: :+1:

Hi Freddie,

I think this will be a concern regardless of how it’s implemented. In the participant pane, if there are a lot of people, the indicator will be hard to see also;

While you may be right for lots of attendees, the situation would be improved for (the majority?)
of meetings
with less than fifteen participants or so.

you would need to scroll through. The focus indicator is actually very prominent and perhaps easier to notice even.

For me, the focus indicator stops being of any use with nine or more participants. For two to nine, I can hardly notice it due to reasons given.

Even worse: when screensharing is active, there is no way for me to tell who is talking at all because there is no UI element except when I switch back to tile mode where I can’t see the shared content any more.

So my proposal would provide functionality Jitsi does not provide at the moment. Compared to other meeting solutions, this is quite frankly a bit of an embarrassment to us when we ask our business customers to join our Jitsi meeting instance. But this is just my personal experience.

The background color can always be changed for better contrast. Again, this is already possible and depends on the person’s preference.

I don’t know how to modify the background color. This is not obvious to the average user.

Furthermore, this would not solve the current issue of no contrast difference between active and inactive microphones or cameras.

I really can not follow your rationale here, I’m sorry.

I’m not sure what rationale there is to follow. I’ve said the mic active/inactive distinction is neat, however, I see no improvement in the circle around the mic in the participant pane over the more obvious, more distinct focus indicator.

App development is not for “the average user”, so I’m not sure what point you’re even trying to make there.

To be honest, statements like this irk me to no limits. An “embarrassment” that one solution renders things differently from another? To me, this smacks of condescension and I detest it - but that’s a personal sentiment. Show me 2 videoconferencing platforms that have the exact same UI or render features in exactly the same way and I’ll shut up. Even better, show me ANY other videoconferencing platform that offers ALL the things that Jitsi offers (whether free or paid) and I’ll shut up. Otherwise, this is beginning to look like a self-indulgent rant to me and I frankly don’t care for such.

It’s OK. I won’t bother you any further.