Showing ideas with label other.
Show all ideas
Status:
New Ideas
Submitted on
‎Nov 28, 2024
03:57 AM
Submitted by
Mike_AutomaticN
on
‎Nov 28, 2024
03:57 AM
![10 - Mercury 10 - Mercury](/html/@3E2B981D004C65386E7C71F08391F0C2/rank_icons/Rank-Mercury.png)
What is the proposed idea/solution? Allowing forms to create NEW linked records, rather than only allowing to select from a list of already existing linked records. In other words, the ability for a form to have its Parent form submission, and one or multiple Child form submissions (for the linked records). See Fillout's solution as an example. Dummy scenario: If I want to submit information for a Family (Family table) and for the members of the Family (Members table) which can be one or multiple, I would not be able to do this from only one Airtable Form. I would need to submit one form for the Family information, and separate forms for each Member. How does is solve the user problems? Would avoid having to integrate different softwares, build dirty automations, or handling re-directs, just for the sake of creating linked records. How was this validated? This issue comes up with plenty of my clients, multiple questions have been asked on the Community on how to handle this, and it has been a topic of discussion with fellow builders and consultants. However, I'm not sure whether it has been actually submitted as a "New Idea"/Feature Request (if it was already, I'm super sorry -however it might be useful to bring it up again!). Basically, Airtable forms do not allow to create NEW linked records from the form itself (i.e. we can currently only select from a dropdown of already existing linked records). There are obviously several different workarounds such as: (i) using other form softwares (e.g. Fillout which I really love, but is still a pain to need additional integration just for this); (ii) handling the creation of new linked fields from interfaces rather than forms (i.e. would mean treating the interface itself as a pseudo form); (iii) having temporary fields on the main table which are only used to push data via an automation for the creation of the linked field (super dirty solution which I would almost never recommend); and (iv) others. However, all of those solutions are far from ideal. Who is the target audience? Airtable users who need to capture information via forms for a base with multiple linked tables (I'd say almost every Airtable user). Thanks!!
... View more
Status:
New Ideas
Submitted on
‎Sep 20, 2024
12:52 PM
Submitted by
Jasonl2l
on
‎Sep 20, 2024
12:52 PM
![5 - Automation Enthusiast 5 - Automation Enthusiast](/html/@8E0586A35C6D0D07EA6A610CF7AEF6BF/rank_icons/Rank-AutomationEnthusiast.png)
I think a key missing feature is the ability to embed items into an interface. I think this could take one of two (or both) forms. 1. A field that functions kind of like a "document" field. You insert an embed link. When viewed in a base, or in a grid/list view, it just shows as a preview - But when viewed in a record details pane - it translates to a custom sizable-embedded page. Each record's embedded view is based on the link in the field - just like the Button field type. 2. A "hard-coded" form - kind of like the difference between the "button field type" and the buttons you can set up in an interface. In the from-scratch interface builder - there would be a new element type called "Embed" where you could manual populate to with whatever embedded link needed. For example a google doc - or a news feed, etc. This by itself would accomplish half of the ideas that users have been putting forward for new automation triggers and integrations.
... View more
Status:
New Ideas
Submitted on
‎Mar 14, 2023
11:53 PM
Submitted by
Alex_from_66_PR
on
‎Mar 14, 2023
11:53 PM
![6 - Interface Innovator 6 - Interface Innovator](/html/@781FA7B006C69ED0612A0090F8465157/rank_icons/Rank-InterfaceInnovator.png)
It would be great if Pro Plan got a bit of an upgrade on storage and record limits. Whats weird is that there is no tier between Pro and Enterprise. Airtable should either make Enterprise not have a minimum of 25 users as lots of Small businesses dont need that or make a tier between Enterprise and Pro. 10k USD is an insane jump up from spending 2000 USD a year. This just doesn't make sense. A lot of Saas companies forget that their billing is quite high for places like southeast Asia where businesses are NOT printing money like in the west. Our business is at 15 GB of storage and about 20k records. Once we are over our storage limit, why cant we simple upgrade the storage only? We dont need more functionality. But are willing to pay extra for storage, but not 5 times the amount we pay now. If Airtable doesn't change this policy, people who outgrow the Pro plan will go elsewhere. Smartsuite is another strong contender coming up and they are pumping out new features and update by the week. Custom fields, map fields, linked records from other bases. All things that make a lot of sense but for some reason airtable doesn't implement.
... View more
Status:
New Ideas
Submitted on
‎Jun 05, 2024
05:49 AM
Submitted by
Jason_Knighten1
on
‎Jun 05, 2024
05:49 AM
![8 - Airtable Astronomer 8 - Airtable Astronomer](/html/@8B0B6143080A349E4F5B6E12C21C6051/rank_icons/Rank-Astronomer.png)
This would enable ability to highlight/bring attention to specific comments in long text fields. This should be functional in both Data and Interface layers.
... View more
Status:
New Ideas
Submitted on
‎Feb 23, 2024
04:11 AM
Submitted by
Jordanwoods
on
‎Feb 23, 2024
04:11 AM
![5 - Automation Enthusiast 5 - Automation Enthusiast](/html/@8E0586A35C6D0D07EA6A610CF7AEF6BF/rank_icons/Rank-AutomationEnthusiast.png)
Imagine a panel above the tables that toggled a group of tables! This way, you could have big bases organized a lot better. I have some bases which have a different sections that are co-related.. it'd be nice to organize the "Enrollment" section as separate from the "Registration" section and as separate from the "Billing" Section without having to do complex base syncing. I like having everything from one business in one base but the table tabs fill up quick!
... View more
Status:
Launched
Submitted on
‎Jun 08, 2023
10:23 AM
Submitted by
NTaghizadeh
on
‎Jun 08, 2023
10:23 AM
![5 - Automation Enthusiast 5 - Automation Enthusiast](/html/@8E0586A35C6D0D07EA6A610CF7AEF6BF/rank_icons/Rank-AutomationEnthusiast.png)
What is the proposed idea/solution? A few simple reaction options for record comments, e.g, thumbs up, thumbs down, laugh, smiling face How does is solve the user problems? No simple way to show that you have seen and are actioning a comment unless you leave another comment, which sometimes feels like more than is needed. Who is the target audience? Anyone who uses Airtable for communicating on projects - between teams or with clients!
... View more
Status:
New Ideas
Submitted on
‎Nov 21, 2024
11:52 AM
Submitted by
Ringthebells86
on
‎Nov 21, 2024
11:52 AM
![6 - Interface Innovator 6 - Interface Innovator](/html/@781FA7B006C69ED0612A0090F8465157/rank_icons/Rank-InterfaceInnovator.png)
What is the proposed idea/solution? Airtable desperately needs more options for date filtering. Most importantly the following: within next calendar week/month within past calendar week/month on or before the end of this calendar week on or before the end of next calendar week Airtable barely has filters for calendar weeks which is extremely frustrating because most program managers are looking at the tasks for the given week and it is super annoying to have to make it a custom between 2 date fields because saying on or before one week from now will show tasks from the following week within the first few days. How does is solve the user problems? This makes searches more automated so they will automatically show you what is happening in the given calendar week/month without having to do the current way which is: Date is on or after 11/1/2024 or date is on or before 11/30/2024 (which has to manually be changed every month). It just makes things unnecessarily difficult when it should just be simple to add these date filters.
... View more
Status:
New Ideas
Submitted on
‎May 18, 2023
04:25 PM
Submitted by
Tito_Alverio
on
‎May 18, 2023
04:25 PM
![6 - Interface Innovator 6 - Interface Innovator](/html/@781FA7B006C69ED0612A0090F8465157/rank_icons/Rank-InterfaceInnovator.png)
What is the proposed idea/solution? Be able to group and/or hide tables in a base. For example I am linking to records in other bases, so tables are being imported into bases. I'd like to hide these synced tables to keep the base organzied and focused for users. How does is solve the user problems? Helps with staying organized and keeping a base clean. I'd like to hide these synced tables to keep the base organized and focused for users. It could help clearly show which tables are meant to be interacted with, while other tables are purely due to being referenced, thus wanting to hide them. How was this validated? ? Who is the target audience? Everyone using Airtable
... View more
Status:
New Ideas
Submitted on
‎Feb 01, 2024
11:48 AM
Submitted by
Russell_Findlay
on
‎Feb 01, 2024
11:48 AM
![8 - Airtable Astronomer 8 - Airtable Astronomer](/html/@8B0B6143080A349E4F5B6E12C21C6051/rank_icons/Rank-Astronomer.png)
What is the proposed idea/solution? for better accessibility - please label the colours with text - when hovering over in the base design How does is solve the user problems? 1 in 12 men and 1 in 200 women have some form of colour blindness - or colour visual deficiency. This means that distinguishing many of the colours in airtable is difficult. Giving bases different colours is great as this is both a visual cue when you use multiple bases and interfaces - and in communicating with the teams that use them - however when some users aren't clear which colour is which (I am one and i develop tools heavily in the platform) it causes needless friction - for what should be a quick fix How was this validated? please see standard accessibility guidelines for using colours and ensuring those with sight problems can see the tools effectively. Who is the target audience? all users and all users with colour blindness - e.g. disabled providing greater accessibility.
... View more
Status:
New Ideas
Submitted on
‎Apr 19, 2023
10:32 AM
Submitted by
Molly_Mangan
on
‎Apr 19, 2023
10:32 AM
![5 - Automation Enthusiast 5 - Automation Enthusiast](/html/@8E0586A35C6D0D07EA6A610CF7AEF6BF/rank_icons/Rank-AutomationEnthusiast.png)
What is the proposed idea/solution? Price per user rather than per Workspace - Or allow better organization, folders, etc within a Workspace. We pay more per user on a Pro plan than we do for our CRM. Yet if we want to collaborate with external parties we need to move the base to a free workspace due to the sharing limitations. We are a small company and purchased pro for everyone - yet it is becoming a mess. We cannot even segment visibility of bases within the workspace from some users, since everyone needs to be a pro for that workspace. Enterprise is outlandishly expensive for small organizations. We are willing to pay for the service, but the limits even on a pro plan are limiting our use and commitment to the product. How does is solve the user problems? ... How was this validated? ... Who is the target audience? ...
... View more