First thing to point out is that It’s difficult to judge the new site by simply asking if its better for “mainstream users”…better at what? Lay out the pain-points you see now and how you know they are pain points.
My only gripe with the current UI is that very few user actions are automated, if I have the components of a curve LP but I don’t have the LP tokens, I have to first go to curve and get the LP token. Automating this step for the user is what the non crypto native wants. Some things are already automated (curve LP token to cvx curve LP token for example) but why stop there? Why not be able to enter the cvx (or yearn position) if I already have the basic components of the position without going to curve (or yearn) at all?!
Convenience driven automation is the UX that the site is missing. The thing holding Defi back from mainstream is that Cefi products are just simpler to use…you give them your money, they do the rest, Abra should be no different. You’d never invest in an ETF that makes you buy assets in proportion then send them to the ETF manager so why does abra have that expectation of their users?
The menu bar at top has been made more complex with more options (even some that are the same function!!) …The protocol is simple, you put up collateral, you borrow, you farm, you stake, you vote. Why present more options than this in the most general menu? current menu bar is better than the prototype. The exception is the blockchain selection menu moving it from the main menu bar does well to ensure the app feels consistent no matter what chain your are on or positions you are using, it does well in unifying the UX for different chains and create an experience where everything you need to do to participate in the protocol can be done from the site.
The “positions” page replacing the dashboard page is a step back imo, clicking on your wallet ID is the more intuitive way of seeing the money you’ve got in the protocol and it doesn’t clutter the menu bar. In general creating a more complex menu bar is not best for any users.
In all honesty, the new front end screams low effort, it’s not as polished as the current site and lacks the implicit understanding of the protocol that the current artwork gives off to all users. If we are going to get rid of the marketing and artwork why don’t we just turn into a loan as a service protocol where other front ends can adopt the backend protocol and loan products and wrap the in their own UI.
TLDR; Focus on actual UI/UX instead of artwork or marketing changes. Automation is an actual element of the user experience that can be improved - make the protocol low effort by means of automation with Zap like functionality, thats what actually makes or breaks things (in terms of convenience) for new users. Art and marketing is the one thing that abra does better than most. Going for the “defi generic” low effort look is a giant risk to expansion of the user base IMO.
KISS: Keep It Simple Stupid.
The required information is there, change the way information is organized and presented (typographic changes like font size/spacing, proper font weight for its intended purpose, etc…) and the effort required of the user to use the products as a non-blockchain native user. The brand is strong, don’t kill it because you don’t have a marketing team or branding experience. As a random do you know what DAI is? No, but chances are you have a better idea what ‘magic internet money’ is when you hear the name. That identity is something many protocols would kill for as defi goes mainstream in the coming years.