I get it, the designers need the screen space to show off their cool new Lower Zone, Side Zones, and whatnot. But, in doing so they make it close to impossible to navigate the cool new Zones. I say give the User the ability to adjust the bars to suit their needs. If you are a youngster and still have great eyes, that user can make them small and enjoy the added screen space. But, for us older, weak eyed types, let us have the ability to thicken the scrollbars to our needs and tastes. Just my 2cents.
I’ll chime in and say the scrollbars are way too small. Mousewheel scrolling is not fine enough to help with this problem either. This is really the only problem I have with Cubase.
UPDATE: What drives me even worse than the angel-hair scroll bars is the ABSENCE of the down and up (or left and right) arrows at the boundary of each scroll bar. I use those ALL the time as a ‘page up’ or ‘page down’ functions with the mouse. But now that these are -gone-, I am -constantly- overshooting the place I want to navigate to. OUTRAGEOUS!
Indeed. I find I use scroll bars mostly in the Score Editor in the lower zone. Finding the scroll bar not easy, and once I do I move it too much. Left and right arrows would be great for that. Even a few pixels larger grab area would be helpful, for clicking or using the scroll wheel.
I agree. This part of the GUI hampers rather than helps (for me, at least), and I would be happy to sacrifice a bit of real estate for scroll bars and arrows that you can actually see and use easily and quickly.
How right you are!
The absence of the left and right arrows to navigate the Arrange page is really killing me… and not softly.
Hate to be the odd one out but I like these tiny scroll bars precisely because they don’t take up much space. I rarely use them -I navigate with the mouse scroll wheel (plus modifier key for horizontal scrolling or zooming) which I find much quicker than a scroll bar, large or small.
Add me to the odd ones as well.
Maybe I would need a direct comparison for a final decision, but I get by quite fine so far as well. It’s just a bit unusual and irritating at first, because the old scrollbars had become a part of the general UI body feeling.
+1 here as well
Ha ha ha!!! I’ve only been using Cubase (and WaveLab) for three months and came to the same conclusion. For all my hair-pulling, your comment is cathartic and appreciated. Under the hood, these products are wildly powerful, but between the ‘inventive’ UI elements, the unintuitive menu structure, and the documentation (that reads like a provisional patent application), they’re unnecessarily difficult to grasp. I sincerely wish Steinberg would reach outside their immediate labor pool and contract a dedicated UI expert to perform a usability study and recommend standard/popular UI conventions where appropriate. And, while I’m ranting, that includes following best practices for readability and negative space. That is to say, cramming as much of everything into as little space as possible eventually produces diminished returns.
And I agree with what has already been said: Where there are sufficient supporters on both sides of a usability debate, offer a choice in Preferences. [Or, stick with tradition and hide it in a submenu somewhere.]
Now, Steinberg, since I’m so eternally upset, here’s my $99 upgrade fee.
I’ve been saying that since SX2. SX1 was a ‘clean slate’. If one were able to look back, it was explicitly designed to be clean and simple. Unfortunately… and I -know- how unPC this sounds, I always come back to a certain ‘Germanic’ concept of UI design which seems like the total opposite of ‘Silicon Valley’ UX. They just can’t seem to help themselves—they -live- to cram as many gizmos as possible onto each window.
This is the tired analogy I always think of WRT Cubase: I think back to my old BMW where (literally) -every- gizmo always felt like it was in the wrong place versus American or Japanese autos… eg. the window controls were right where you wouldn’t expect them top be… next to the stick shift! Yes, one can get used to these things, but it takes a TON of memorisation or added effort, which takes one’s mind off of THE ROAD! It seems like they go out of their way to be (cough) ‘distinctive’. To my mind, people use Windows or Mac largely for a CONSISTENT UI.
Why -not- use the standard icons/objects/etc? Why the need to re-invent the scrollbar? (…er ‘wheel’)
To my mind, the minimalist designs of web apps should be the goal. Valhalla plug-ins are a great example.
Trying using the scrollbars on a 4K screen… PAIN!
I thought it was just me suntower. I have a Hyundai Genesis 4.6, and although the placement of accessories in my car is not as bad as what you mentioned, everything in the Genesis seems as if though it were moved two to three inches from where I’m expecting them to be. Not in a good way either. Prior to this, all I drove was Chevrolets. Every single day I drive this car, I curse the person who designed it that way.
Sorry, back on topic, it would be nice if Steinberg had designed some sort of ribbon controller for scrolling.
+1 for improving the skinny scroll bars and the missing arrows.
I find it amazing that this has to be put in as a “Feature Request” instead of an “Issue” due to incompetent program design.
I’m sure there are others…