nopCommerce 3.80 BETA released. Please share your impressions

IMHO now that the Manage Shipping Methods and Shipping Methods Restrictions have been integrated into the Fixed Rate Shipping and Shipping by Weight providers, it makes no sense to keep Fixed Rate Shipping since:
- It can be configured with the Shipping by Weight provider: just apply the rate in the first term of the formula (Formula to calculate rates [additional fixed cost] + ([order total weight] - [lower weight limit]) * [rate per weight unit] + [order subtotal] * [charge percentage])
- In this way it can also be configured by store, warehouse, country/state/zip, etc.

Furthermore:
- It is very confusing and difficult to navigate, to now have the Manage Shipping Methods and Shipping Methods Restrictions as tabs, but when you are in any of the two the tabs are not available and you cannot go to the other option or to the configuration of the shipping method provider.
- When adding/editing new records there is no contextual help and in some cases it might difficult. For instance in the ZIP field it is not clear if you can set several ZIPs separated by coma or if you can wildcard signs.

IMHO the Specification Attributes and the Product Attributes tabs should also be optional in the Basic mode, since there are several types of stores which don't need them at all.

Upload logo should be in the Basic mode of the General Settings, since all stores show the company logo

It will be helpful that the sub-sections in the Settings sections should have titles, as it is done in the Edit Product Details. Example for Catalog Settings: Search, Product Reviews, Performance, Share, etc.

Great job !
The new admin area is a real treat
for what i have seen so far its A significant leap forward

Thumbs up!

New York wrote:
Tecnofin wrote:

Hi,

Thanks a lot for all suggestions! I've just created work items for most of them. Some of them are already implemented or fixed

a.m. wrote:

Re-designed one is better for me.

a.m. wrote:
I much rather prefer the redesigned one.

a.m. wrote:
Andrei,
Thanks.   Does the beta no-source link point to updated code, or do we need to download current source and build it ourselves?

a.m. wrote:

I have the same issue...