LXer's New Look: Final Beta Testing
|
| Author | Content |
|---|---|
| dcparris Aug 28, 2006 3:34 PM EDT |
We now have the beta site running off the live data. Please play with all the buttons over at:
http://donkey.lxer.com/ I've been using it for two weeks, but we would like to get feedback from our readers before going live. |
| Scott_Ruecker Aug 28, 2006 3:40 PM EDT |
Yes, YEs, YES!!! I Think it is AWESOME! I LOOKS GREAT! I found the search field again thanks to Don on the "New Look" beta I AM IN LOVE!!!!...sorta, I mean, its a site, not a girl. But still. |
| techiem2 Aug 28, 2006 5:18 PM EDT |
Woohoo! Scott: What is this "girl" you mention? ;) |
| Scott_Ruecker Aug 28, 2006 5:26 PM EDT |
I wish I was actually in love..it takes two to tango. I can't seem to meet a girl that can pass my "make or break question" What is the question you ask? "Have you read any good books lately?" It sounds like an easy question but the answer tells you everything you need to know, about the person you think you like. "I don't like to read" "It takes to long" "What book?" "What do you mean by lately?" If someone actually does like you, they will think of SOMETHING they have read. |
| dek Aug 28, 2006 7:11 PM EDT |
SR > "What book?" How about, "Book?? What's a book?" Don K. |
| Scott_Ruecker Aug 28, 2006 7:15 PM EDT |
Oh I have got that answer on occasion as well. I figured why list the obvious one though? |
| techiem2 Aug 28, 2006 7:18 PM EDT |
hehe. how bout: "I read Lxer every day, does that count?" :) |
| Scott_Ruecker Aug 28, 2006 7:24 PM EDT |
Uhh..YEAH! It sure does! You see, the Editors and more specifically a 'certain' Editor are extremely handsome, talented, well read and well groomed. That's my story and I'm stickin' to it. ;-) |
| dek Aug 28, 2006 7:26 PM EDT |
BTW: the new pages are good! I like them. The look and feel are well done. (Just adding my noise to the acclaim side of the room!) Don K. PS; Hoping the name of the beta wasn't inspired by yours truly!! (Don K. should != donkey) :-D |
| dinotrac Aug 28, 2006 7:38 PM EDT |
Looks nice...though the turquoise on gray stuff still bothers me just a touch from the standpoint of readers with less than perfect eyes (like me) or color-blindness. Seen much worse, though. |
| jimf Aug 28, 2006 8:41 PM EDT |
> Looks nice...though the turquoise on gray stuff still bothers me just a touch from the standpoint of readers with less than perfect eyes (like me) I'd agree exactly. It would be nice to have a little more contrast between the turquoise and the grey or even the white backgrounds. At least on the article headers. How about making that text a littler darker. |
| tuxchick2 Aug 28, 2006 9:06 PM EDT |
what, no blink tags? sheesh. |
| jimf Aug 28, 2006 9:58 PM EDT |
> what, no blink tags? sheesh. Have mercy on the epileptics out there :D |
| Sander_Marechal Aug 28, 2006 10:21 PM EDT |
It looks great. Kudos to the designers! |
| incinerator Aug 29, 2006 12:03 AM EDT |
looks very nice indeed. |
| jdixon Aug 29, 2006 5:10 AM EDT |
I agree that the turquoise on gray is a bit hard to read. Also, the discussions don't separate as cleanly without the dividing lines, making them harder to distinguish. Otherwise it looks OK. |
| dcparris Aug 29, 2006 7:12 AM EDT |
Thanks for the feedback. I'll pass this along. |
| NoDough Aug 29, 2006 8:47 AM EDT |
Love it. |
| cjcox Aug 29, 2006 9:26 AM EDT |
I don't like it. Perhaps something customizable? Maybe should have multiple styles sheets... one that makes it look plain, clean and simple (as it is now). Fonts are small, lots of wasted real estate. Just my opinion. |
| dcparris Aug 29, 2006 9:42 AM EDT |
Well, I've requested multiple style sheets - themes, if you will. I don't know though. The font issue is supposed to have been corrected, so we'll see. |
| jimf Aug 29, 2006 9:48 AM EDT |
> The font issue is supposed to have been corrected Yeah, I did notice. Looks fine now. |
| theboomboomcars Aug 29, 2006 9:55 AM EDT |
It has a much more inviting feel to it. |
| tminton Sep 22, 2006 11:37 AM EDT |
Love the new look ;-) |
| dcparris Sep 22, 2006 3:03 PM EDT |
Cool! I am soooo glad we're finally getting it in place. Y'all can look forward to further progress as well. It might take a little time, but we are definitely moving forward here. |
| Sander_Marechal Sep 24, 2006 10:46 PM EDT |
Love the new look. Ine nitpick: I can't find the earlier/next 20 articles or pagination links at the bottom of the front page. Where did they go? |
| Iain Sep 25, 2006 3:01 AM EDT |
The new format looks much better in a normal browser, but looks much worse in a non-javascript, non-css browser like Dillo. Please would you consider keeping the old interface as an option or maybe automatically loading the old interface for mobile phones or old-fashioned browsers? |
| bigmase521 Sep 25, 2006 5:24 AM EDT |
I like the new design guys! I find the Red Hat Network red exclaimation point icons to be a nice touch :-p If I had one gripe, it's the teal. The teal and the grey don't work well, and the teal and the red/maroon that you use seem to clash horribly. Lose the teal, and you're good to go! |
| dinotrac Sep 25, 2006 6:03 AM EDT |
>it's the teal. The teal and the grey don't work well I must agree. I don't know about "working well", but it's still not contrast-y enough for comfortable reading by these old eyes. |
| techiem2 Sep 25, 2006 6:23 AM EDT |
Just a note that the comments linking to wrong story bug is still there. :) (If you post from the Read More link, it goes to the right place, but the comments counter is still blank in the front page for the story) |
| Libervis Sep 25, 2006 7:57 AM EDT |
New look seems more modern although it will require some getting used to. To be honest it looks a little busy for me compared to the old look and I'm also wondering if it may be better if it had a full width (as the main menu bar). While full width would loose the nice shadow effect you would gain some space and would IMO match the red menu bar better. Just my 2c. :) |
| dcparris Sep 25, 2006 8:34 AM EDT |
Question: We have been seeking exactly this kind of input for two months. Other than complaints about the "Latest discussions" table, not much other criticism has been offered. Now that we've actually implemented the new look, all of a sudden there are gripes galore??? O.k., I've brought up the need to allow our readers to change the css where they want. Hopefully, we can even let you guys contribute your own themes. ;-) |
| tuxchick2 Sep 25, 2006 8:42 AM EDT |
silly editor, it always works that way. :) |
| peragrin Sep 25, 2006 8:45 AM EDT |
That's was my thought Tuxchick. I was going to complain, but i really do like the new look. I just want a "slightly" different screen to show when i am logged in or not. A Change the background colour, or highlight colour. Something simple but noticable between being logged in or not. |
| dcparris Sep 25, 2006 8:45 AM EDT |
You're right, of course. I just *had* to say that. :-) |
| Koriel Sep 25, 2006 2:17 PM EDT |
Im late to the show as usual probably because im back to crappy dialup which aggravates me and therefore i use the net less, but i love the new look, very slick looking, well done! |
| mattm Sep 26, 2006 5:46 AM EDT |
The only problem I have is I can no longer view the page well on my Cingular 2125 Windows Mobile phone. The desktop view makes me scroll left and right too much, and the one column view is just plain unreadable...any thoughts for a WAP based access page? |
| dcparris Sep 26, 2006 6:20 AM EDT |
We'll definitely look into making WAP access available. I'm really sorry about the problems you're having. I do wish some of our cell phone readers had checked out our beta prior to our move. In the future, I'll try to explicitly invite cell phone and other users to help us in testing. I will warn that a WAP version might take a little time, since we already have another project on our plate. |
| Sander_Marechal Sep 26, 2006 1:53 PM EDT |
More complaints: Long titles overlap. See the "VIRTUAL BRIDGES ANNOUNCES WIN4BSD PRODUCT TO RUN WINDOWS ON FREEBSD/PC-BSD DESKTOP" on the front page. The line breaks just before DESKTOP on my 1280x1024 but the second part is placed too high and overlaps the underline of the previous line. Your CSS: h1, h2, h3, h4 { margin: 5px 0; line-height: 1; font-family: "Lucida Grande", sans-serif; } You also forgot to specify a unit for the height, making it invalid CSS. Change the above to: h1, h2, h3, h4 { margin: 5px 0; line-height: 1.25em; font-family: "Lucida Grande", sans-serif; } and everything works perfectly (I love live CSS editing with the webdev toolbar :-) |
| bob Sep 26, 2006 3:32 PM EDT |
Thanks for the bug report, sander... Your fix is posted and the results look good. Nice work! |
| 1c3d0g Sep 28, 2006 2:06 PM EDT |
Woah! Whoever did this re-design, congrats! :-D |
| cheshire137 Sep 29, 2006 4:10 AM EDT |
"Whoever did this re-design, congrats!" Thanks, 1c3d0g; that'd be me. :) "any thoughts for a WAP based access page?" I can begin working on that in my spare time (which isn't much, but that's how I got the whole layout designed initially). Need to find a good emulator for testing... "You also forgot to specify a unit for the height, making it invalid CSS." That is not invalid; see http://www.w3.org/TR/CSS21/visudet.html#line-height 1.25em is as acceptable as 1.25 or 125%. |
| dcparris Sep 29, 2006 6:26 AM EDT |
I would definitely like to have our readers capable of browsing LXer with WAP-enabled devices. For some, that is actually important. For others, what better to do with your time while standing in line at the bank or store than find out what's going on in the world? |
| dinotrac Sep 29, 2006 6:34 AM EDT |
With regard to WAP - It ain't perfect, but... Google has a "WAP-inator" that makes it possible (if not always wonderful) to browse most web sites. The official name is the Google Wireless Transcoder, and it is similar to sites like skweezer in that it will reformat a "normal" webpage to fit a mobile device. If you use Google from your phone, all of the links will be Transcoded. You can see it on the web in a normal browser at http://www.google.com/gwt/n . If Google gives you the shivers, check out http://skweezer.com. |
| Sander_Marechal Sep 29, 2006 6:48 AM EDT |
Quoting:That is not invalid; see http://www.w3.org/TR/CSS21/visudet.html#line-height 1.25em is as acceptable as 1.25 or 125%. I stand corrected, but in that case there's a bug in the W3C's CSS validator. It choked with a parsing error when it encountered "line-height: 1;" in the original CSS. Edit: And a feature request to top it off: nested quotes. I originally typed: Quoting:[quote]You also forgot to specify a unit for the height, making it invalid CSS.That is not invalid; see http://www.w3.org/TR/CSS21/visudet.html#line-height 1.25em is as acceptable as 1.25 or 125%.[/quote] |
| d0nk3y Oct 01, 2006 1:57 PM EDT |
And what, pray tell, is wrong with donkey? ;-) Cheshire - awesome new design - loving it! |
Posting in this forum is limited to members of the group: [Editors, MEMBERS, SITEADMINS.]
Becoming a member of LXer is easy and free. Join Us!