Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
MacRumors 2011 Redesign
- Thread starter cxny
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I would prefer to see the +/- removed from replies and put back on the main page for the article instead.
Also, the articles are a bit long on the new layout as well, consider posting a teaser and require a click to get to the full post, or offer a headline view similar to the one offered by Destructoid.com.
Otherwise, I am quite happy with the new design, at the very least it doesn't immediately offend me the way Slashdot and IGN redesigns have done.
Also, the articles are a bit long on the new layout as well, consider posting a teaser and require a click to get to the full post, or offer a headline view similar to the one offered by Destructoid.com.
Otherwise, I am quite happy with the new design, at the very least it doesn't immediately offend me the way Slashdot and IGN redesigns have done.
You're more of the "people that are never happy about anything" minority.
If we're having requests, can we have quick look when you hover over the title of a thread?
You need to use the RSS feed if you check that much. Let RSS do it for you. Work smarter, not harder
Also, the article mentions that if you don't like the fixed width you can change it back to variable. So your No. 1 is moot. As far as your No. 3 I find the site substantially faster.
Thanks for the thought for RSS. I have not tried that before.
As to your other thoughts, unfortunately we each can only talk about our OWN machine and experience. I assure you I was in fluid mode when I wrote my piece, and also confirm that on my machine, it is much slower. The owners of this site can do with my issues as they wish. We all can only tell them what their design means to us. I do not want to lose this site. If your RSS works out I'm better than before. There are many meanings of the word moot. I assume you mean open for discussion
I don't understand why anyone would want to use the fluid layout. Optimum maximum line length for copy is 2-3 alphabets (52-78 characters). Anything above or below that is difficult to read. The article copy in the redesign is at pretty much the top end of that range. Why would you want to make it wider?
Also, for at least five years, the majority of new site designs have been fixed at a width around 960px. The new fixed-width design on this site is 1000px wide. If you keep your browser window at around 1100px wide, 99% of the internet will fit in the window without horizontal scrolling. If your screen resolution is too narrow for the site or you use your browser at full screen, you're providing a poor environment for the entire internet. I don't see how that's Macrumor's fault.
One simple solution to the resolution problem would be using media queries in your CSS to render different layouts for different browser sizes. Rather than increase the width of the individual columns (and destroying your readability), you would simply tell the site to drop to one column when the browser resolution is below a certain size or increase to a three-column layout when the browser resolution is above a certain size.
Here's an example of the above: http://colly.com. You can increase and decrease the width of your browser window to see the effect. This can also work as a mobile solution.
My only real complaint is that I don't care for the fade at the top of the background. I would have gone with solid white.
Also, for at least five years, the majority of new site designs have been fixed at a width around 960px. The new fixed-width design on this site is 1000px wide. If you keep your browser window at around 1100px wide, 99% of the internet will fit in the window without horizontal scrolling. If your screen resolution is too narrow for the site or you use your browser at full screen, you're providing a poor environment for the entire internet. I don't see how that's Macrumor's fault.
One simple solution to the resolution problem would be using media queries in your CSS to render different layouts for different browser sizes. Rather than increase the width of the individual columns (and destroying your readability), you would simply tell the site to drop to one column when the browser resolution is below a certain size or increase to a three-column layout when the browser resolution is above a certain size.
Here's an example of the above: http://colly.com. You can increase and decrease the width of your browser window to see the effect. This can also work as a mobile solution.
My only real complaint is that I don't care for the fade at the top of the background. I would have gone with solid white.
Same here...the new layout is hideous and disproportionately "blown-up", just like Skype's new UI. But at least it seems faster now.
And what about the classic "positive" or "negative" votes?
I haven't posted in months, been mainly lurking in the shadows. However, I had to login and show my appreciation for the new look.
Kudos to the MR team!
Kudos to the MR team!
You need to use the RSS feed if you check that much. Let RSS do it for you. Work smarter, not harder
Also, the article mentions that if you don't like the fixed width you can change it back to variable. So your No. 1 is moot. As far as your No. 3 I find the site substantially faster.
Unfortunately RSS is not allowed on my network. I will try on my AIR this evening.
Sad to see the pos/neg ratings cut.
Looks ok, but I'm very sad to see the positive/negative rating on articles gone.
It's a very useful summary of the public attitudes towards various Apple-related events, the sort of poll-like feedback that you could never get anywhere else. I imagine the mods feel that it breeds conflict and snap judgments, but even at that cost, the scores provided an interesting window into aggregate opinion and something no other Mac website (that I know of) offered. With Apple increasingly turning up in important political debates, the aggregate opinion of Apple enthusiasts is an interesting and itself newsworthy piece of information. It's a loss to see it go.
Looks ok, but I'm very sad to see the positive/negative rating on articles gone.
It's a very useful summary of the public attitudes towards various Apple-related events, the sort of poll-like feedback that you could never get anywhere else. I imagine the mods feel that it breeds conflict and snap judgments, but even at that cost, the scores provided an interesting window into aggregate opinion and something no other Mac website (that I know of) offered. With Apple increasingly turning up in important political debates, the aggregate opinion of Apple enthusiasts is an interesting and itself newsworthy piece of information. It's a loss to see it go.
on front page the main boxes are nicely cleaned up - however i miss the positive vs. negative votes.. how am i supposed to form an opinion now?? tis a shame it gets replaced by giant tweet/facebook propagators..
i'm not such a fan of how the right side was redesigned.. it looks as though my CSS is turned off.. such big type and these bullet points.. i'd pull both of these back and perhaps add a degree darker background color for the :hover of any link.. help give us some navigational feedback..
it's also a shame to cram everything onto the righthand side.. i could usually ignore the lefthand side stuff and quickly scroll to my two forums of interest [design + graphics, web dev] - but now i'm scrolling through the equivalent of 3-4 pages.. has the readership aged that much?? ha - guess i just have to hit zoom out one step. = my 2.5 ¢
i'm not such a fan of how the right side was redesigned.. it looks as though my CSS is turned off.. such big type and these bullet points.. i'd pull both of these back and perhaps add a degree darker background color for the :hover of any link.. help give us some navigational feedback..
it's also a shame to cram everything onto the righthand side.. i could usually ignore the lefthand side stuff and quickly scroll to my two forums of interest [design + graphics, web dev] - but now i'm scrolling through the equivalent of 3-4 pages.. has the readership aged that much?? ha - guess i just have to hit zoom out one step. = my 2.5 ¢
Nice work.
In the past I had problems with reading when enlarging the font size with Mozilla Firefox. The fonts went bigger but the columns [boxes] went smaller making it hard to read. Now the font size and the colums [boxes] both grow so I can read full lines instead of broken one's.
In the past I had problems with reading when enlarging the font size with Mozilla Firefox. The fonts went bigger but the columns [boxes] went smaller making it hard to read. Now the font size and the colums [boxes] both grow so I can read full lines instead of broken one's.