New page design

Jump to Latest
#21
The new version has a dark mode, which I must say is quite nice.

Give it a couple months and I'm sure they'll sort out 99% of the issues. I personally welcome the change. Gonna take some getting used to, but that is to be expected.
 
#25
And it is a bummer because this forum is one thing I could still use without assistance. I'm struggling to remain as independent as possible. I walk, I shop, I garden, I clean the house with minimal assistance. I still build my electronic circuits with multiple magnifiers. I'm trying to maintain my independence.
 
#28
Most of the time I’m using an iPad Pro to read DiyAudio. I’m getting used to the new design, but it’s very hard to see the difference between threads I have and the threads I haven’t. The difference with the font and the bold font is not very significant. Perhaps a color difference would help (bold black vs. normal dark blue?).

And once I’ve read a thread I have to refresh the page manually to make this visible in the thread list. Quite annoying.

Regards, Gerrit
 
#29
TheGimp said:
Thanks for the hint on classic and full width. Much better.
Click to expand...
Not much better, really. No! Say a bit less bloated, but quite silly instead. And not "classic" at all altogether. Basically in this "classic" mode, you trade in info density vs. illegibility There was a time, where UPPERCASE BLAH BLAH FOR THEAD TITLES was banished by the admins. And now you go systematically along with boldugly font for no function at all but to serve some weird understanding of design. Please stop this nonsense. And make "classic" more classic, with a lean font, which was really pleasant, please. And also let then choose the "classic" mode in a non-logged-in state, also.
 
#34
Set font to small for a smaller mess? I don't like it. "Classic", in my oppinion, does by no means match the former info density and optical easiness. Unfortunately I have no screenshot of the former Style as have been presented until the new Version. In my memory, it was much, much better than this "Classic" called steampunk approach. It would be useful then if someone could post a picture of the former look to compare.

All the following Screenshots are with the same settings. The readability of "light" and "dark" is obviously far better than in "classic" mode. Judge yourself. Therefore, a combination of "light" along with a smaller vertical spancing by avoidance of all this useless, but certainly decorative space would make me happy.

Light:

light.png


Classic:

classic.png


You may directly compare light v.s classic now. Classic should be denser than Light in terms of Information - but e.g. has a font that squashes into the broad ?

lightClassic.png
 
#36
I do wonder why designers of forums and forum software pay so little attention to the work done in graphic design for print. The use of san-serif fonts may look 'clean' but readability suffers vs a good serif font; especially as size goes down. There are modern serif typefaces available and now that screen resolution is so good, there is no reason not to use them.
 
#37
To migrate a forum into another software might be like DIY audio - as a result, MK I might not only be different, but hopefully better overall, and also maybe be partially worse than the previous take was. And the iterative process of further improving and debugging may be fun, I beleive that it is this that keeps us alive as DIY-ers.

Unfortunately for a forum, the first impression will always be a visual one. And in this case, there are some unhappy glitches, biasing the whole user experience to follow. Never mind, go on, don't be afraid, be keen, and try using this optically repelling beast ... and then ... surprise, surprise ! As for me, browsing and using the new forum is overall a very, very pleasant experience. It got better than it was with the former forum version.

Therefore, if I have chimed into the lamento regarding info density and readability, I also want to cudo this bunch of brisk migrators for their work and for the much improved general useability of the new forum, thanks to it's overall lean and intuitive interface. Cudos, despite the fact, that optically, it is partially flawed. And also, I am very confident that MK II will be further improved. And I also hope that MK II will still not be perfect by then. But insted still will be somehow decently flawed by remaining and maybe even new glitches. This, on order to maintain the impetus to further improve things ... and also to feed discussions such as this one.

Iteration, iteration, iteration, iteration, iteration ... This is genuine and joyful DIY.

So, once again, and in best terms of never-ending DIY: Thank you for this new prototype!
 
Last edited:
#39
andy2 said:
Maybe the reason for changing may not be "to make things better", but for some other reasons.
Click to expand...

Yes, because the old forum software was dead-ended, not supported, and otherwise orphaned. The forum could not continue to exist on the old software. There was much gnashing of teeth and collapsing into fainting couches considering all the tings that needed to happen to transfer the site to a modern and future-flexible software platform. It was not done lightly nor without huge conversations and discussions and months worth of work behind the scenes.

The changeover has been fairly smooth, all things considered. :yes:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom