Submitted on
Sep 24, 2016
12:00 PM
Submitted by
Andrew_Enright
on
Sep 24, 2016
12:00 PM
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/11f0c/11f0cf1f94be6702315345a14772f2706e3c5219" alt="9 - Sun 9 - Sun"
We’d like entire rows to be highlighted in a given color based on the color of a single-select choice in a field/column that has been designated the “row color” field.
... View more
Submitted on
Oct 01, 2019
04:29 PM
Submitted by
Jeremy_Oglesby
on
Oct 01, 2019
04:29 PM
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/4ba95/4ba950647594b8051d2aade556e22c28481a89c2" alt="14 - Jupiter 14 - Jupiter"
I’d like to see the iOS app be treated as a first-class, native app. The app itself is done fairly well - it runs smoothly and mostly meets my needs for browsing and adding to bases (minus a few key features, for which there are already feature requests).
But the iOS app is not treated as a first-class citizen in the iOS ecosystem, and this is evident in two things that I’d like to see fixed.
When hitting a URL for a table or a record, Safari opens to handle the URL, as usual, but it ultimately resolves to a page on the Airtable site suggesting I download the Airtable app… but I have the Airtable app. So there is a link at the bottom that says “Already have the app? Open in app.” – most web apps that have iOS native apps as well preform this redirect on behalf of the user, so that the user doesn’t have to click an extra link to view their content in the native app. Great, so I tap that link, and my Airtable app opens to the last table I was on when I last closed it, spins for a bit, and then just stays on that last table I was on, even though the record link I originally hit was for a different base/table. I’d like to see this changed so that working with table/record URL’s in the iOS ecosystem always treats the iOS app as the target for those URL’s, and then successfully opens the table or record requested.
Shortcuts integration. Right now all I can do in Shortcuts is “Open App: Airtable”. Super disappointing. Anything else I want to do I have to do via the API, and at the end of it all, I can’t ask Shortcuts to take me to my newly created record in the native app because of issue #1 described above. I’d like to see the Airtable iOS app donate a slew of useful actions to the Shortcuts app. Airtable is an incredible productivity tool, and Shortcuts is the new, definitive productivity hub in the iOS ecosystem.
Please update the iOS app to behave like a true, fully-functional, native iOS productivity app.
... View more
Submitted on
Feb 08, 2018
08:11 AM
Submitted by
chris_cuellar
on
Feb 08, 2018
08:11 AM
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/688db/688dbec3550d13df2de29a54bd8dfd3507244a06" alt="5 - Automation Enthusiast 5 - Automation Enthusiast"
Hi, having lots of issues where Editors are continuously hiding or re-arranging fields on a shared grid view. It would be great if user permissions to hide and remove fields was limited to Creators . Also +1 for more granular user permissions in general. Thanks!
... View more
Submitted on
Feb 10, 2021
03:55 AM
Submitted by
andywingrave
on
Feb 10, 2021
03:55 AM
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/fd1f1/fd1f17a720e7a28d7eb58fdf75c54d467f24ed6f" alt="10 - Mercury 10 - Mercury"
Hey there,
I want to first off note that I don’t want this to sound like a complaint. :pray:
I love Airtable, and I have used it now for 3 years across countless large organisations and medium-sized clients.
I use it for everything I do. But there was always one part of the UX that I always saw stressing users out, and that was the way you can just click and accidentally add a brand new record at the bottom without ever meaning to. The process to create a record was so easy it was overwhelming, because to non-experienced, pressing command + z is often not learned, so they’d see Airtable as a place where it wasn’t safe to click anywhere (A problem later solved, in part for teams, by restricting people’s ability to add records in a base, or just using a sync so nobody can create records), and let’s not even talk about creating a record which is part of a filtered view because that’s just madness squared … But when teaching Airtable, all I’ve ever heard for 3 years now is a lot of “Whoops”…“Didn’t mean to do that”…“Whoops, where did that go?”, “Whoops, how do I?”/… etc etc etc
And even to experienced users, the daily mini-frustrations I, myself, have when accidentally creating a record and having to command + z was one thing I was sure that Airtable would fix sooner or later, so I didn’t let it bug me, and went on my merry way… Loving pretty much everything else about Airtable, creating thousands of accidental records along the way…“Whoops, command+z”
Then August 2020 hit, and they let a team mess around with the record creation flow, causing mayhem among my clients, and colleagues alike, creating, what I think is one of the longest threads on this community yet.
We all had a little moan, a little joke, and I think for the most part they changed the functionality back - even though, it’s still, in my opinion, clunkier than it was before it was messed with.
But then something happened about a month back… Whereby Airtable have given the field creation process the record treatment and made all sides of their app complete and utter minefields. So today, as I created my 10th accidental field of the day, I decided to write a polite petition to ask the UX designer and Product team…nay, BEG them to fix this!
Here’s my suggestion as an alternative:
Keep the Plus signs. They’re nice and clear. Everyone is happy :green_circle:
Please for the love of god stop messing with this empty space - This is important space that doesn’t need to be clickable 🔴
and …
If you really, REALLY have to…Why not add a little friendly round button that a user can click on, so that we can all be very comfortable that this behaviour was intentional :large_blue_circle:
It feels like this decision was made to increase field creation, which just seems mad to me. I typically want less fields…Not more! This is the graph of user frustration that I imagine the analytics doesn’t show:
Please say it’s not just me :cry:
As a side note, I’ve actually been building my bases in Google Sheets recently, and my stress levels have been decreasing as a consequence, but it still feels a little like this
And as another side note…Airtable Product team - Sorry for the rant. I rant because I care :crazy_face: … You all rock :metal: !
... View more
Submitted on
Jul 29, 2019
08:12 AM
Submitted by
Kent_MacWilliam
on
Jul 29, 2019
08:12 AM
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/688db/688dbec3550d13df2de29a54bd8dfd3507244a06" alt="5 - Automation Enthusiast 5 - Automation Enthusiast"
Ability to have a default value for single select - would be perfect for forms filled by applicants in our HR process.
... View more
Submitted on
Mar 07, 2017
10:39 AM
Submitted by
Ryan_Jaccard
on
Mar 07, 2017
10:39 AM
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/688db/688dbec3550d13df2de29a54bd8dfd3507244a06" alt="5 - Automation Enthusiast 5 - Automation Enthusiast"
In our CRM, we have a COMPANY Table and a CONTACT Table (among others). Within each of these tables, we have a CLIENT view and SUPPLIER view.
PROBLEM: EXPANDED RECORDS
That said, when I expand a record in the Contact Table > Supplier View, I’m inundated with irrelevant Client-Contact-specific fields (ex. ‘Won Projects’) haphazardly stacked at the bottom of the record. It’s become very confusing and bulky for our staff and, in my opinion, it’s probably a big reason so many of us wish we could ‘link bases’; but I won’t dive into that.
PROBLEM: EXPANDED LINKED RECORDS
Likewise, when I’m in the Company Table > Client View, and I want to access Contact Info for one of our Client companies, I’ll simply click to expand one of the linked records (linked from the Contact Table). In this case, I’m still inundated with Supplier-contact-specific fields, lumped together at the bottom. Ultimately, we need these gone!
SOLUTION
I’d love for a given record to expand into a Default Expanded View Preference (i.e. with default visible fields) that was specified during the creation of this contact/record (i.e. every time I add a new record to the Contact Table, I can select what type of record it is [“Client” vs "Supplier]; in turn, instructing AirTable on which fields are relevant to that record). The result, in the above example of expanded linked records — our entire sales team will always see this expanded linked record as a “Client”-specific record, per the records’ system-wide default expanded view setting.
DEFAULT VIEW & CUSTOM VIEW PREFERENCE
But then (hear me out!), once any given record is expanded, I’d like the option to specify, from a dropdown within that expanded record view, how I’d personally prefer to view that contact/record going forward. For example, the Default View for a given Contact record could’ve been set to “Client” when it was created; but, depending on my department and the info I typically need, I can now select an alternate ‘view preference’ from the expanded record drop-down (ex. maybe I choose “Client Finance Data” or “Client Holiday Gift Info”). Once I’ve selected a new expanded ‘view preference’, AirTable would remember this selection as my new personal default for that specific contact/record. The result — anytime the record is expanded by ME, I’ll only see the info that’s relevant to my work. If I need additional info/fields in the future, I can always change my “view preference” with the dropdown.
Again, I think this feature would help to calm people’s consistent request to link bases. I do believe all data can be kept in 1 base, and I’d prefer it that way; but we need more features to help us hide things that we don’t want to see.
... View more
Submitted on
Oct 25, 2022
11:22 AM
Submitted by
Evan_Eglinton
on
Oct 25, 2022
11:22 AM
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/688db/688dbec3550d13df2de29a54bd8dfd3507244a06" alt="5 - Automation Enthusiast 5 - Automation Enthusiast"
Dark Mode and themes. It seems standard nowadays to allow users to tweak the appearance of the app or interface they are using, except for Airtable. The ability to use your own colours to better suit how you organize your work and reducing eye strain with a dark mode seems like a no-brainer. Please Airtable, listen to the users, and give us dark mode.
... View more
Status:
New Ideas
Submitted on
Dec 02, 2024
09:30 AM
Submitted by
kuovonne
on
Dec 02, 2024
09:30 AM
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/5a581/5a581155185d1e6024fc670ae7285b3e116f5731" alt="18 - Pluto 18 - Pluto"
What is the proposed idea/solution? In the configuration screen for a linked record field, show the name of the backlink field. This could be either read-only or editable. For same-table links, state that the field is a same-table link and does not have a backlink field. When creating a new linked record field to a different table, state that a backlink field will be created and display the name that will be used (or let the user enter a name for the backlink). How does is solve the user problems? Many novice creators do not realize that a back link field is created when they create a new linked record field. This would let them know. Once users are accustomed to the creation of backlink fields, some are surprised and confused when same table links do not have backlink fields. This would make things clearer for them. Creators often don't think about naming the backlink field, as the default name usually works when there is only one linked between two tables. However, sometimes the default name doesn't work and should be changed, especially when there are multiple links between tables. Showing the name reminds creators to pay attention to the backlink field name. When deleting a linked record field, the backlink field also often needs to be deleted as well (versus hanging around as a single line text field). Showing the name of the backlink field will make creators more aware that they should delete the backlink field, and also make it easier to find the backlink field to delete it. When there are multiple links between tables, especially in legacy bases where backlinks were not named well, it can be difficult to figure out relationships. Although the Base Schema extension shows which linked record fields go together, in a large base, the diagram is a huge tangled mess and too hard to work with. It is also possible to identify backlinks by looking at field data, but this is cumbersome and depends on knowing the data values or having the ability to put in test data. The "Show Dependencies" tool lists the backlink field among all the other field dependencies. This is probably the easiest way to see the name of the backlink field, but the nature of the dependency is not obvious to new users. Scripting is another way of identifying backlinks, but that is also a niche skill. How was this validated? Personal experience maintaining bases. Who is the target audience? People with creator permissions who will be creating and maintaining linked record fields, including both novice and experienced creators.
... View more
Status:
New Ideas
Submitted on
Feb 14, 2024
11:00 AM
Submitted by
Ringthebells86
on
Feb 14, 2024
11:00 AM
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/b12e5/b12e564afd47ca01c7bf11a101ecf7f5f1cfca26" alt="6 - Interface Innovator 6 - Interface Innovator"
Airtable finally added this calendar month as a date filter option which is great, however there needs to be a last calendar month instead of just last month. We need to submit every month our expenses from the previous month. So for example today, I need to be able to see all expenses from January (i.e. last calendar month). How it is now if I do last month, it will show me expenses from Jan 14 - Feb 14 which is not useful.
... View more
Status:
New Ideas
Submitted on
Apr 21, 2023
01:44 PM
Submitted by
isaiahmiller97
on
Apr 21, 2023
01:44 PM
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/b12e5/b12e564afd47ca01c7bf11a101ecf7f5f1cfca26" alt="6 - Interface Innovator 6 - Interface Innovator"
We have identified a critical need in the Airtable community for more flexibility when it comes to automation and instance limits. Many users, especially those on the Pro plan, are struggling with these limitations, resulting in bottlenecks and hampering their workflows. We propose an ad-hoc automation and instance limit enhancement to address these concerns. What is the proposed idea/solution? Our proposed idea is to introduce ad-hoc automation and instance limit enhancements for Pro users. This solution would allow users to purchase additional automations and instances as needed, without having to upgrade to the Enterprise plan. Users can maintain their current subscription level while still accessing the increased automation capacity they require for their workflows. How does it solve users' problems? By offering ad-hoc automation and instance limit enhancements, users can: Overcome the 50 automation limit that is currently causing bottlenecks in their workflows. Customize their automation capacity according to their specific needs, providing more flexibility and scalability. Avoid building their own software or switching to other platforms, as they can continue using Airtable with increased automation capabilities. Save costs by not having to upgrade to the Enterprise plan when they only require additional automations and instances. How was this validated? This need was validated through direct user feedback and community discussions, where many users have expressed their struggles with the current automation and instance limits. The demand for increased flexibility in automation capacity is evident, with users on the Pro plan actively seeking creative solutions to bypass these limitations. Who is the target audience? The target audience for this product enhancement includes: Pro users who have reached or are nearing their automation and instance limits and require additional capacity for their workflows. Businesses with unique automation requirements that might not necessarily require the full features of the Enterprise plan. Users who are considering building their own software or switching platforms due to the current automation limitations in Airtable. Conclusion: Introducing ad-hoc automation and instance limit enhancements for Pro users addresses a critical need in the Airtable community. This product idea not only provides increased flexibility and scalability for users but also ensures that they can continue using Airtable without the need to upgrade to a higher subscription tier or seek alternative solutions.
... View more