Feedback Request on new Forum Index Format

I like the shorter reading line. I am not sure about the ALL CAPS for names. It feels like I am slowing down my reading a bit to take that in for a long name, like Lex for example. I definitely would like a shorter reading line.

It looks crap.

 

Though the name *before* the message is a good idea. At least you know who is saying what follows, important on a post that extends higher than the browser window.

 

And the narrower line width is also a step in a good direction.

 

There are lots of better ways to carry more information - much better ways. vBulletin, apart from coding problems, is something worth emulating. E.g.:

 

http://www.dayofdefeat.net/forums/index.php

Many of the responses (such as Peter A's) are in the vein: "I've got a big monitor. The new layout crowds the text into the left side of my screen and leaves half the screen empty."

 

But many other responses applaud the short reading line. I must say the short reading line is deliberate and one of the goals, and so I'm glad that some people recognized that. I'm a bit surprised to hear that people with large monitors are sizing their browsers to have the text go across the full-width, and that they are disturbed that the design does not let them continue to do that.

 

I have a 19" monitor at high resolution and I always size it to about half the screen width when visiting web sites -- just to make text more readable in web sites that have elastic text widths which can fill the full width of the screen if I have my window too big. I always consider this as a design defect, not as an admirable feature, to be honest.

 

You might notice that the majority of professional web sites are designed to a width of 768 pixels, and text lines tend to be occupy around half to two-thirds of this. This is not just to leave space for links, ads, or sidebars, because in many layouts the extra space is left blank.

The look is nice. Though for users that use non-traditional devices (PDA's and such) the new format may be more of a headache. It was nice that Photo Net was low tech in that regard.

 

I'll say that the names should not be first. It would be nice also if we could see how the posting are threaded instead. Meaning that we see how/who's message was responded to. Sort of how most other forums are done.

Frank, I visited Zeldman's site. Main content does not have an elastic width on his site.

On my screen, there's nothing to the right of the grey bar. A quarter of the page is totally wasted.

Yea, what's on the right empty column there? I see people say grey column, I don't see it.

 

It's still too cramped. My eyes hurt.

Am I the only one on Photo.net thinking that UBB-style forum interface is the best one around (e.g. <A HREF="http://www.robgalbraith.com/ubbthreads/postlist.php?Cat=&Board=UBB9">Rob Galbraith's forums</A>)?<BR><BR>

 

I appreciate Photo.net's adherence to traditions, but if we are starting to change, why re-invent the wheel?<BR><BR>

 

$0.00 worth from a non-subscriber. :-)

yuck. i don't see the point of having the related links occupying that big gray space.

As with most cosmetic changes there is a comfort factor to get beyond. People are accustomed to a certain look but within a very short time will adapt to this change and it will be a non-issue. If it bring revenue into the site then I'm all for it. Maybe if you could add a touch more room for text you could find a good balance.

Well I see that as I was writing my last post this thread reverted to the old design. Timing is everything! :-)

The proposed new design is only used in the Site Feedback forum, and only in threads when they are accessed directly from the main forum index page. From anywhere else, the scripts that generate the old design will run.

On XP Home with IE6 looks fine. Same goes for NT with IE6. BUT I am one of the few who prefers the text to go full length across the screen. That way I don't have to scroll so much. I like the new look of the threads better (other than the scrunched margins. won't mention that again :-). Having the name first, and by using the same font for all of the names (in a thread), makes for an improvement. I really like the old Unified Forum better though. Primarily because of how the Poster's name is left aligned in it's own column. I though it was cleaner looking.

 

Is all that blank real estate on the right side staying blank?

Patrick, the empty blank area at right won't be empty. It will contain text links to other pages on the site. For example, in the Nikon forum it will contain links to Nikon reviews, Nikon news, Nikon ads in the classifieds section, etc. It will also contain paid "contextual advertising", such as Google AdSense text-link ads.

Brian, sounds good. I figured as much. It DEFINITELY makes sense to change it then. I'm all for it :-)

What is the reason for having the names in all caps? It looks like we're all shouting our names. Plus there was some mention on a Leica forum thread of a study that showed that writing in all caps reduced the readability of a sentence but a huge ammount. Something about us looking at the shape of a word as much as the actual letters in it.

 

Plus, I'll say again, names after and make that space between the bottom and the divider bigger.

 

For design purposes, I still like the old style. However, for photo.net survival purposes, I'm happy to have ad space if it helps the bottom line.

I'm not real crazy about the new format. On my (yes, I know it's old) system with Netscape 4.79 the buttons (post question, search, etc) end up over the forum title. I already have to dodge the Adorama ad on the homepage, and don't have the gray menu bar at top :)

<p>Also, the space between forum questions seems too much. The dual color separating forum questions is nice. I can get used to the split screen if that's the way it goes.

I like the new look, except for the "names above posting" bit. When I send e-mail or write a letter, I put my name below my writings. I kinda expect the same thing when reading postings on a website. I wish the entire layout (header and all) could have been just a little wider, but I appreciate the better readability. Bob does the same with new articles and they seem fine to me.

<br>

<img src=/graphics/grey.gif width=8 height=8> Patrick Hudepohl (icons here) (date here)

New articles are (or should be!) formatted using the photo.net stylesheet, which I believe gives 10% margins on each side of the text.

 

I see the new forum layout is currently using 100% of the screen width for responses and the adminintration link is gone (bug?). I think it would probably look better (and be more readable) with 10% margins. I assume books and magazines have margins rather than printing to the edge of the page because it improves readability?

 

I don't mind the small caps font for the names. I think it differentiates them from the text nicely.

 

Note that if you make a post to a thread and then use the "return to thread" link, you get a page with the old formatting style, not the new one.

Bob, when the new script replaces the old one, all those kind of problems will go away. Meanwhile, it isn't worth it to fix that just for this test-driving environment.

I can live with it.

Getting better. I like the elastic message area now, and the new font size for names. I'm not crazy about the new separator between messages in a thread and I think on IE 6 there is just a little too much space between messages, however this is getting very personal. I think the major issues have been addressed.

 

I think you should start a new thread so everyone can comment on the most recent look. Too confusing to have all the comments in this thread refering to different itterations of the layout.

There's something else I just realised. The posters' names don't contrast enough with the background. So if I'm scrolling down to look for a particular name I can't see it. With the normal format, the poster's name is very clear and stands out well.

 

And lose the small caps, too. That plays a part in making the names harder to read. Caps work well in small amounts but not here. Add that to the low contrast blue and you can't read a damned thing.

In case anybody is keeping score, I have now received a wide selection opinions on the subject of the name position, size, and color. All equally adamant.

The font type/style still looks rather poor; at any resolution viewed. <b>Why not improve it to equal the old style?</b> Some letters of each person's name sometimes have to be guessed; at least that is how it appears on this computer; or 2 others; using IE 6; at any resolution.