Give it a Bash, the new Look

Originally posted by enjoies05

Originally posted by psyopswatcher
No Kudos please, only constructive criticism. (so they may see a list without sifting thru all the rah-rahs.)

It's all awful I tells ya... AWFUL !

Thanks, Enjoies. Don't feel anyone has to play babysitter to a live rant thread. I won't, even one of my own.



The EDIT button has no background color but it is there. Yea, that's spooky--ghosted out. Illustrating doomsday with colorization techniques really has brought out the gloomies, eh?

How about some good New Orleans dirge blues to quicken the pace? Ratz, all I have is NPR dirges and marches on the radio these days.

Originally posted by Voxel
This "redesign" is exactly the reason you don't let highschool kids near photoshop. Look, there are exactly TWO (2) and only two types of sites on the internet that should get black backgrounds: band sites and artsy "Look I Can Draw" sites.

Those sites both have one thing in common: very little text. Those sites are made to LOOK at so the black background is a benefit (the eye is focused on the pictures.)

Sites that are 99.6% text like news and forum sites (and ATS) should never, ever get a dark background. Do the kids playing with photoshop behind the scenes know why sites like CNN, NYT, Google, or even review sites have light colored or mostly white backgrounds? Do they know why, way back in 2001, sites like arstechnica.com moved from a black background to a white one?

The answer is because they are sites meant to be READ and not just viewed.

Instead of sitting down and trying to make a "cool" site design, first just just think about what this site's purpose is (information, discussion) and make a functional site design first.

Jon

Thanks Voxel, now that's the kind of criticism I was looking for. You sound like a pro.

Here's an artsy site of my own:

Old Trucks

Such as it is, to illustrate your point.

My eyes!!!!! I know I'm getting up there in age, but come on. I'm poking around here almost everyday, but I guess I'm going to have to take a break for a while. Seriously guys, it looks cool, but my almost middle aged peepers can't hang. I'll have to check back in at a later date.
Peace

"It Burns! It Burns!"

I know this is the complaint thread, and I certainly don't want to interrupt a good round of bashing, but I do want to point out some things and offer a glimmer of hope:

- Everything is in a state of flux right now as the Overlord tweaks a whole bunch of settings.

- If you see black-on-black or gray-on-gray text combinations that seem impossible to read, it's probably not you, but a transitional state.

- There are a LOT of settings to tweak, and when one changes, it can affect others.

- Doing all this live might seem nuts, and it will disrupt things during the transition, but it allows getting a lot of quick feedback that wouldn't otherwise be available.

- Going from a generally light theme to a generally dark theme is a major, MAJOR transition. Everything from avatars to ads can have an impact on the overall appearance of the site.

- It will take a while to get everything "dark friendly", but once that's done, I think a lot of the additional concerns will have been addressed.

- SO has indicated that there will eventually be some degree of customization of the appearance of things like text to offer more choices to members who may have trouble with the default. In fact, check this out.

Most importantly, we ARE listening to your feedback, so please try not to get too frustrated with the process.

Despite some teething pains and transitional issues, I suspect most (if not all) members who are not happy with the new theme may well come to like it.

And if not, we'll work on that, too.

These are just my personal opinions but I think the new forum look is awful. The colors are way too dark. Black and gray on everything is just too drab and feels unfriendly. The sites front page looks too robotic. If you wanted to make it look like a filing cabinet then it worked because the front page is now just as exciting as a filing cabinet. The site has lost personality and any flare it had. There are too many ads for too many different things. The site suddenly feels very cold and corporate. It is also harder to navigate.

I was a bit concerned at first, but since some of the text colors have been tweaked it's looking really nice. I'ts just as easy, if not easier to read.

I still think the screen size should be dynamic (1600 x 1200 on this end)

God! I hate all this complaining! I can't believe it! I know... I didn't have to read the thread, but where has everyone been? Did you not see that this is a WORK IN PROGRESS? Did you not read that it will take SEVERAL WEEKS OF TWEAKING to get the final product? Do you not TRUST THE AMIGOS????

OK, that's my complaint. Everyone starts complaining at the VERY FIRST SIGN OF CHANGE! Ack! Give a day or a week or two. THEN if something sucks, let the powers know. That's my opinion.

Sorry for the rant and please don't take it personally, but I figured as long as everyone was complaining...

Oh, and I LOVE the black/gray color scheme. Fancy, techie, glossy and It's hot!

Still a little upset that the page won't fit my resolution.

But I will hold firm in my resolve. I will not change my resolution, nor abandon ATS.

I will squint when necessary. I will wear my glasses. I will sit closer to the monitor, and dammit I will read conspiracy theories until I go blind.

Originally posted by psyopswatcher

Originally posted by Voxel
This "redesign" is exactly the reason you don't let highschool kids near photoshop. Look, there are exactly TWO (2) and only two types of sites on the internet that should get black backgrounds: band sites and artsy "Look I Can Draw" sites.

Those sites both have one thing in common: very little text. Those sites are made to LOOK at so the black background is a benefit (the eye is focused on the pictures.)

Sites that are 99.6% text like news and forum sites (and ATS) should never, ever get a dark background. Do the kids playing with photoshop behind the scenes know why sites like CNN, NYT, Google, or even review sites have light colored or mostly white backgrounds? Do they know why, way back in 2001, sites like arstechnica.com moved from a black background to a white one?

The answer is because they are sites meant to be READ and not just viewed.

Instead of sitting down and trying to make a "cool" site design, first just just think about what this site's purpose is (information, discussion) and make a functional site design first.

Jon

Thanks Voxel, now that's the kind of criticism I was looking for. You sound like a pro.

I guess he missed sites like this one.

Now as BH said, this is a work in progress. Changes of this magnitude need tweaking. That being said, the look of ATS is changing, our policies haven't. Let's discuss this politely.

I like it so far, and I am by NO MEANS a Young Whipper-Snapper...

I think if you really, REALLY look at it, you can see where SO is going with this and the PROMISE it has...

After all, when has SO, or any of the Admins. let us down before????

Give em' a chance to finish...

Semper

its just the colours , do they have to be so dark ?.

i loved the old vers of the site it was nice and clear, plus on the front page you could see the most recent posts updated every 5 mins....i miss that .


snoopyuk

Originally posted by intrepid
I guess he missed sites like this one.

See the forum there is just a small part of that site and not THE site. The objective at EA is 1) to sell games and 2) to support the customers. Selling games is basically the same as selling music or movies and those sites usually have a dark/black background. Notice that the support section of EA's site is nice and white because that part of the site has completely different functionality (selling crap vs. telling crap.)

Now as BH said, this is a work in progress. Changes of this magnitude need tweaking. That being said, the look of ATS is changing, our policies haven't. Let's discuss this politely.

True and the most nagging design problems can be fixed by overridding the CSS. I'm just trying to figure out if I can get the design to stretch to the window size because the way it is now is really a bad thing, in my opinion.

Jon

OK, upfront: I realise that this is a work in progress, and these are just some issues I'd like to see addressed in the fullness of whatever.

I also have a large blank grey space to the right of my window.

The ability to edit my posts seems to have gone walkies.

I also used the "threads in progress" section, and it has been reduced to too few threads, IMO.

How can one tell emboldened white text from links if links are in bold white text?

I too am in late middle age and it would be nice if the text, generally, was just a teeny tiny bit larger... I suspect the three amigos are no longer in the first flush of youth and may only be a few years away from having to take off their glasses to read text. To the person who said, "GET GLASSES"... just you wait. Time catches up with all of us and weird things happen to your body. You'll see what some of us are complaining about, in time, and why your exhortation is not, in fact, a solution.

On the general look and feel: I don't care as much about it as I do about functionality, but actually... sorry, guys, hate to say it, but I'm not that keen. ATS was never a particularly artistic-looking site, and it still isn't, and that's fine, because I'm here to learn and debate, not to get my graphic jollies. But I'm really not that keen on the tiny, fussy, not-terribly-readable icons for the various boards and for the taskbar at the top of each page. The different coloured folders simply make the icons themselves harder to read: for me, the "rainbow" look was informative but uncluttered: and uncluttered is good even if it offends some viewers' aesthetic sensibilities.

You can't see links which are encased in an external source box when you select either dark or darkest, i like the darkest style but can't be bothered to keep switching between the selections. I hope this a part of the work in progress. Nice idea to include the scale, lightest is pretty much old ATS style.

Edit:

Example...

Also, I can't read the text on my profile page because it's black on black. Hope this speeds up the work you're doin.

[edit on 5/12/06 by byhiniur]

I think the new titlebar looks awesome but you should of kept with the original colors and jsut changed the face of the website

Originally posted by byhiniur
You can't see links which are encased in an external source box when you select either dark or darkest, i like the darkest style but can't be bothered to keep switching between the selections. I hope this a part of the work in progress. Nice idea to include the scale, lightest is pretty much old ATS style.

Edit:

Example...

I've been playing with the settings and with "light" I see everything. Even "Example" is totally clear.

Originally posted by Voxel

Originally posted by intrepid
I guess he missed sites like this one.

See the forum there is just a small part of that site and not THE site. The objective at EA is 1) to sell games and 2) to support the customers. Selling games is basically the same as selling music or movies and those sites usually have a dark/black background. Notice that the support section of EA's site is nice and white because that part of the site has completely different functionality (selling crap vs. telling crap.)

Um, no. Check it out. That part of the site is designed for members to talk(blog). Ie: print, what your buggaboo seemed to be all about.

i dont like the layout the old one with all the hot topics and most recent topics was my favorite.

I think they are trying to tell us to go away and get a life or something. I'll change the resolution and see it that helps.

mikell

Hey I think it,s a been lot of hard work with great results.

I love the ''darkest dark light lightest'' settings.

I always keep mine on dark... It,s great at 5.00am . It colour co-ordinates perfectly with a flickering TV. wooooot!!!!

Folks, I realize this is the thread for complaints but PLEASE read the main thread re: the changes before you post here. Many of the things you're all mentioning are being addressed. It's not like anyone is ignoring the complaints/suggestions put forth here. As was said in the main thread, this is a work in progress. Please give the courtesy to SO and allow him to do his work. If something looks botched for a few hours, give him a chance.

Also, to the person who made a comment about "high school kids with photoshop", that is not what this thread was intended for. The person you're insulting has single handedly created a unique message board like absolutely no other, and has been working on this forum for all of us for years.

Show some respect huh? I appreciate that not everyone likes everything, and ATS certainly encourages and NEVER tries to silence dissent, but I really think someone who has busted their rear end for us for so many years deserves a little more respect than being called high school kid with photoshop or whatever.

Not cool.