Vanguard changes their layout

[cute fuzzy bunny]

Looks like vanguard has totally changed the layout and how you use their fund lists and the profiles.

Anyone else get rather annoyed when they've become familiar with a frequently used site and then they make wholesale changes that really havent accomplished anything other than to make things different, and give some web site programmers something to do?

In the meanwhile, I'm now in my fourth month of not having a working performance tab.

 

[unclemick]

Yes - mildy annoyed.

Looks like they have been trying some sales psych. to direct your thinking.

Think I'll do some poking around this weekend and see what else they have er re-arranged.

heh heh heh -

 

[two4theroad]

I always think that there is a new boss on board whose idea of progress is any change whether good or bad.....
I get frustrated with retail establishments who constantly rearrange the store layout and merchandise. Just when I know where to go to get office supplies, they move the bedsheets there and the pens to the underwear department! I think they do it so we have to walk around searching for things all the time so more time is spent.They are always looking for ways to force people to walk past items they never intended to buy in hopes that we will be gripped with an uncontrollable urge to spend more time/money in their stores.
Maybe Vanguard is doing the same thing
2fer

 

[cute fuzzy bunny]

It appears to be easier for novice users or prospective customers to do a search for funds based on specific criteria by checking off boxes. But once again the business doesnt take into consideration the disruption to existing customers who are familiar with the existing product.

This is the same sort of thing that Yahoo did a couple of months ago. I decided that if I had to learn a new interface, look and feel that I might as well do all that with Google instead.

 

[REWahoo]

Anyone else get rather annoyed when they've become familiar with a frequently used site and then they make wholesale changes that really havent accomplished anything other than to make things different, and give some web site programmers something to do?

Uh oh. "Who moved my beever cheeze!?" rants are the first sign of approaching curmudgeondry...

 

[Notmuchlonger]

Hey you kids get off my yard!

Oh my performance tab works..

 

[unclemick]

Uh oh. "Who moved my beever cheeze!?" rants are the first sign of approaching curmudgeondry...

I got a frame for mine(curmudgeon certificate) - spent the big bucks at WalMart.

heh heh heh -

 

[two4theroad]

It appears to be easier for novice users or prospective customers to do a search for funds based on specific criteria by checking off boxes. But once again the business doesnt take into consideration the disruption to existing customers who are familiar with the existing product.

This is the same sort of thing that Yahoo did a couple of months ago. I decided that if I had to learn a new interface, look and feel that I might as well do all that with Google instead.

The big difference is that Vanguard already has our money and is campaigning for the new customers money, who would you try to attract?

2fer

 

[cute fuzzy bunny]

I'd worry about keeping me and all my money at no sales and marketing costs.

Similar to the discussion in the WSJ thread, its amazing how businesses will offer all sorts of deals and benefits to non customers who havent ever given them a penny, and bupkus to the people who've been paying the bills for years or even decades.

To then tweak and twiddle the product to create unfamiliarity for the customer seems a little ridiculous.

Its been a little while since I fiddled with a web site, but I'm pretty sure its not that hard to maintain two ways to view information and give the user the option of which one they like.

 

[FinanceDude]

In the meanwhile, I'm now in my fourth month of not having a working performance tab.

I never have that problem with my accounts........

 

[RustyShackleford]

I always think that there is a new boss on board whose idea of progress is any change whether good or bad....

Bottom line: bosses are ******* idiots. (BTW, this is the basic
underlying theme of an HBO show I laud in a recent "soapbox" thread).

The usual line is "we've given our website an exciting fresh new look".
I think maybe it doesn't cross these peoples' minds, because they are
too constipated in their thinking, that people actually use internet
websites to do useful stuff. I think maybe they think it's some sort
of advanced video game, so any "new, exciting" change is gonna be a
good change.

Meanwhile, you kids get out of my yard !

 

[unclemick]

I got a frame for mine(curmudgeon certificate) - spent the big bucks at WalMart.

heh heh heh -

Sort of an Oak frame - plus I'll be pissed if my VG ER drift's up from 0.19ish!

heh heh heh - BTW I still make them snail mail me stuff cause I don't really trust those new fangled computers and they haven't paid me cash to quit. .

ok ok maybe I'll toss in the towel and conceed electricity is here to stay! .

 

[two4theroad]

ok ok maybe I'll toss in the towel and conceed electricity is here to stay! .

Have you heard? Electricity is here to stay but the wires will all be gone!

Magnetic transmission a la Tesla?
And I read about the invisibility cloak a few days ago....

We get closer to Star Trek every year.

Beam me up, Scotty.

2fer

 

[Marquette]

Its been a little while since I fiddled with a web site, but I'm pretty sure its not that hard to maintain two ways to view information and give the user the option of which one they like.

It depends, on a lot of things. They could have rewritten the backend system as well and it wasn't a simple port of the front-end because it had a bunch of logic built in. a new site would involve writing two new front-ends then. Of course, if they were smart, they'd make it super-simple to add multiple front ends for the future...

then there's the fact that someone gets a burr that it's not worth spending money on the new site if it doesn't look new and exciting.

the head of ops will freak out that their call center people need to know how to navigate someone through both front-ends.

someone gets worried that people won't be able to know which version of the site their on. things go forward with a single view of the new site.

 

[cute fuzzy bunny]

Well then they shoulda just left the gosh darn thing alone!!!

 

[W2R]

Yes - - I saw it last night and I found it to be annoying as well.

I liked it better the way it was.

Curmudgeoness in Training ("psst! Wellesley!", "I liked the website the OLD way!" - - how's that? ),

W2R

 

[FIREd]

I agree with y'all. They probably spent too much money fixing something that wasn't broke (they should've lowered the ER on their funds by an extra 0.01% instead!). Sure it looks all spiffy and easier to navigate for the novices, but I find the new layout annoying and overly complicated. Oh well, give me a week, and I won't even remember the old website!

 

[poboy]

As if I didn't have enough problems. Last week my cable company changed all the digital channels around and my sports channels are now cartoon or food shows. Before the change I could win a gold medal in channel surfing. To add insult to injury Vanguard has now joined in.

 

[cute fuzzy bunny]

As if I didn't have enough problems. Last week my cable company changed all the digital channels around and my sports channels are now cartoon or food shows.

AUGH!

I hated it when directv did that about 7-8 years ago. "We moved all the channels around so that "like" channels are together and easier to find!!! Oh, and #$%#$ you to everyone who has been a customer all these years and had the channel numbers memorized!!!"

Someone somewhere is busily washing their hands for the 37th time.

I really liked the way the funds used to be displayed, grouped within type and you could drill down on them. When I want to peruse funds, I'm usually looking for a specific category and want to focus on the options. I cant imagine too many newbs with their eyes glazed over saying "ummm...I want a fund with these check boxes for features!!!" :

 

[d]

yes, i too was mildly annoyed. it's in part of case of old dogs, new tricks, i think, coupled with your spouse having moved furniture in the middle of the night, then moving the remote to a new spot. remember the complaints when the set-up of this forum was changed? we'll get accustomed to it, just before they change it again!

 

[samclem]

This is like what Microsoft has done with Office 2007. The arrogance of Microsoft is amazing--they just roll the software out and tell users to like it. This is, after all, a suite of software that people use to do actual w*rk--anyone who uses it a lot has literally thousands of things committed memory (how to set tabs, how to change fonts, the complete tab/pulldown selection sequence needed to change line spacing in a document, etc). It's thousands of dollars worth of experience. If MSFT weren't so arrogant, they'd allow serious users to select "make it look as much like Office 2003 as possible" during setup, and adventurous folks could select "No, surprise me. I want to spend months re-learning everything and being less productive."

 

[chinaco]

This is like what Microsoft has done with Office 2007. The arrogance of Microsoft is amazing--they just roll the software out and tell users to like it. This is, after all, a suite of software that people use to do actual w*rk--anyone who uses it a lot has literally thousands of things committed memory (how to set tabs, how to change fonts, the complete tab/pulldown selection sequence needed to change line spacing in a document, etc). It's thousands of dollars worth of experience. If MSFT weren't so arrogant, they'd allow serious users to select "make it look as much like Office 2003 as possible" during setup, and adventurous folks could select "No, surprise me. I want to spend months re-learning everything and being less productive."

There are two areas of thought... keep it the same or change it.

There is a tremendous cost to maintaining backward compatibility and innovating.

MS has done a pretty good job about moving forward and trying to maintain backward compatibility.

If they do not keep moving forward their competition will overtake them.

But I do agree the continuous change and innovation is a bit frustrating when it is a tool one uses to get work done.

Being in IT... I have gotten use to it. But it is still a struggle to keep up.

 

[Texas Proud]

It appears to be easier for novice users or prospective customers to do a search for funds based on specific criteria by checking off boxes. But once again the business doesnt take into consideration the disruption to existing customers who are familiar with the existing product.

This is the same sort of thing that Yahoo did a couple of months ago. I decided that if I had to learn a new interface, look and feel that I might as well do all that with Google instead.

I still am on the old Yahoo layout... but fear it will not be long before I lose that...

I have an old Excite account that I have used for many years for email.... but they now force you to download a program to read your letters... and with dialup... it takes a LONG time every time..... time to learn Google...

 

[samclem]

There is a tremendous cost to maintaining backward compatibility and innovating.

There's a tremendous cost to their customers when they change things for no reason.

If they do not keep moving forward their competition will overtake them.

Their competition is overtaking them BECAUSE of this stupid philosophy of theirs. It's a primary reason I'm now doing a lot of my work in Open Office--heck, if I have to re-learn everything anyway, that's a great time to secede from the [-]borg[/-] MSFT "family"

 

[chinaco]

There's a tremendous cost to their customers when they change things for no reason.

Their competition is overtaking them BECAUSE of this stupid philosophy of theirs. It's a primary reason I'm now doing a lot of my work in Open Office--heck, if I have to re-learn everything anyway, that's a great time to secede from the [-]borg[/-] MSFT "family"

I understand your frustration.

This is not an MS issue... instead it is innovation. The interfaces and products evolve.

MS has a lock on the Office product market. Plus, the software industry is driven by forced upgrade and lack of support on older versions.

Try a competing product. The microsoft format has become ubiquitous. Software like Open Office does not emulate it well enough and the document formats do not convert perfectly. This is very important for business.

If some company figures out how to perfectly format and emulate Word, Excel, etc and offers a lower cost... the price of office will go down.

But no matter who is on top... you will be pulled along by progress (i.e., innovation).