Its good to identify the most common needs that force users to use scripts.
However, I think the power of fibery is actually associated with design of workflows. This is what makes it very interesting.
The gap I see in user experience is, that the current automations UI is for advanced admin users. I’m not even talking about scripting, but about automations. They are too complex for the average user.
What I suggest is to make it easier for average users to design automations, for example through a witeboard-like logical diagram of triggers, filter and actions.
That will keep it simple for users to design their workflows without the complex automation UI.
So the gap between the automations UI and not using automations at all, is too big, it is not scalable and only focused on admins. You need to allow users to design their own workflows.
Given that the current automations do not have options for forking/looping/batching etc. how would a ‘logical diagram of triggers, filter and actions’ look different from a simple list of items (which is the current UI)?
Obviously, if Fibery developed the same level of power as make/Zapier, then maybe diagrammatic representation become necessary (although Zapier’s UI does seem to simply be a linear series of blocks).
I would also comment that my experience tends to be that people who ‘think visually’ can’t imagine that there are other people out there who prefer more textual representations (and vice versa) so I am always cautious making assumptions about what an ‘average user’ might prefer.
Perhaps you can point to elements of the current UI which you consider ‘too complex’, and if you have ideas for how to simplify (without inhibiting the power) then please share them.
I think homeassistant’s approach to automations design might be an interesting inspiration. They offer a very similar block based approach to fibery (with a lot more blocks to control the logic) but also a diagrammatic way of visualizing the flow.
homeassistant also excels in giving you access to the underlying “code” in almost all areas, including automations, usually in the form of yaml which makes defining, duplicating and tweaking automations a lot easier for the more technical users. I often find myself building the basic flow visually and then switching to yaml to fine-tune everything.
I know this is yet another departure from this topic, but thought I mention it.
Though I do prefer the current UI over a whiteboard style design, I can agree that this implementation would likely suit less advanced users more. Also, it is more appealing from a marketing perspective — as it is pretty common practice to display these types of features in workflow style.