• Infi (unregistered)

    Version 3.0 is clearly the best, but maybe you could incorporate some elements from v0.1 to help with user migration. Also, don't forget to add some javascript pop-up menus, those things are all class - bonus points if they only work in IE.

  • Anonymous (unregistered)

    "Hey guys! Why don't we use the colors from INEDO???"

  • (cs)

    My only constructive comment is that I agree with the posters who find having the navigation bar on the left distinctly unnerving. Mind you, I'm not Arabic.

    Want a deconstructive comment? (Roll up, roll up...) I'm intrigued by the number of respondents who actually care that much about Web look-n-feel. Granted, there are hideous monsters out there (charcoal grey type on navy blue background, anyone?), but any sane design that features a lot of white in the background, a lot of black type in the foreground, and a few decorative splashes of colour is fine. I doubt anyone here so far has had the displeasure of designing newspaper ads in the '80s -- "First spot colour for free; each additional, £500."

    Liked the evolutionary history, though. It moves me to suggest a novel use of CSS and cookies: why not allow a web-site to be skinned? That way, the vast majority of punters who would prefer TDWTF to appear as though it was printed out, laid on a wooden table, and photographed, would be justly rewarded; and I'd still have my Version 0.1. I still get all nostalgic when I look at that.

    PS Apparently "pastelicious" is not a word. It is now. In fact, it's currently my favouritest word in the whole world. Brillant!

    PPS Don't you have a life, for crying out loud? Don't any of these people? Don't I?

    Addendum (2008-01-19 19:09): Back in the day, I never noticed that the ruled paper for TDWTF was inverted so that the margin was on the right-hand side. Is this anything to do with the fact that the navigation bar is currently in a really dumb place?

  • Herohtar (unregistered)

    My evaluation:

    • Header: I approve!
    • Color scheme: I've seen better
    • Menu on the left side: Bad

    Overall: It's time to move on to version 6.0

  • troels (unregistered) in reply to Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward:
    I think you should've gone with a more cutting-edge rounded-corners look.
    I'm sure you can see the contradiction in that sentence.
  • Gary (unregistered)

    Why are there no frames? The only way this site will be as successful as Google or Microsoft is if you use frames.

  • Tayrtahn (unregistered)

    Love the style, hate the colors.

    Biggest problem? Too many colors. Either go with the red and blue, the green and blue, or even red and green. But having all of them arranged this way looks weird.

  • (cs) in reply to Tayrtahn
    Tayrtahn:
    Love the style, hate the colors.

    Biggest problem? Too many colors. Either go with the red and blue, the green and blue, or even red and green. But having all of them arranged this way looks weird.

    I agree with that. Also I've just realized, that navigation on the right was better. I'm not really sure why, but suppose it's because when I'm reading and want to go to beginning of the next line - there's navigation bar instead :/ Nav bar on right was separating text and 'other stuff' much better.

  • Anon (unregistered)

    Still can't use the "Page Down" button to scroll down.

  • Clinton Pierce (unregistered)

    Needs more Enterprise to it. Not nearly enough Frameworks either.

  • (cs) in reply to Anon
    Anon:
    Still can't use the "Page Down" button to scroll down.
    Yes, onPageDown would be an incredibly useful Javascript callback to add to every single bleeding page on the site. This being The Daily WTF, I suggest that the actual effect should be to page up. Or even to redirect to some other, random, article.

    You do need an onLimeGreen callback, though.

    Addendum (2008-01-19 21:18): Hmmm. onPageDown seems to work on Firefox; at least in the comments.

    onLimeGreen doesn't, though.

  • The Real WTF (unregistered) in reply to Irrelevant

    The real wtf is that this is just a phishing attempt by nigerian hackers looking to steal our codes.

    "I can has code plz? email kthxbye."

    CAPTCHA: ITSATRAP

  • Proof Reeder (unregistered)

    Of course, the real WTF is that there's now a sidebar box entitled "Advertisments."

  • Anonym (unregistered)

    This skin is just UGLY.

    Please, could you allow to go back to the old look for registered users, with some account setting or something like that???

    I really hate this new look.... could you just leave things the way they where?, every change you make sucks!, sorry buy it is true :(

  • (cs)

    Can I have all the old corners?

  • Covarr (unregistered)

    The new look works really well in some ways, but I do have one criticism. The "submit your wtf" button at the top of the sidebar doesn't quite match the rest of the sidebar, because its top right corner is not diagonal the way everything else is.

  • Jack (unregistered)

    Could you pleassee switch the left and right columns, as the articles are the first thing i look at on any page it really pains me to have to visually scan right past the sidebar on every refresh.

    -qualms of a UI/UX specialist

  • (cs)

    Less of the vomit colour would be nice. The red of the sidebar sections bugs me as well, and I think it's because the contrast with the background gives it the weird fisher price feel that gives me the shits in XP.

  • Ben (unregistered)

    Too many colours! Cut down the use of random yellow-green.

  • Chad Dweller (unregistered)

    Hi all,

    I like the new colours, but I prefer that the nav-bar be on the right. My reasoning is that with every line I read on the site, my eyes go back to the left edge of my monitor and read the nav-bar instead of the next word on the page. This is a serious problem in being able to read quickly where, on every line, you must search for the start of the line. I like the new look, but this is just a small problem...

    Sincerely, Chad Dweller reader for two years

  • Izzy (unregistered)

    Another "new and improved" look, but functionally identical product.

    It's like when you're pretending to write code, but really just wasting time, e.g. adjusting the indentation on the comments. Sorry to sound snarky, but you just caught me sitting here with a cold soldering iron, adjusting the component spacing on the /schematic/ of my hobby project so it would look prettier. Grrr.

    captcha: Help! I am being held prisoner in a Chinese Room!

  • Dave (unregistered) in reply to CJ
    I really like the new look, it adds quite a bit of energy to the website.
    Unfortunately the energy being added is the need to move the mouse over the index in the left-hand column to get to the actual article links to click on. This reduces the usability of the page as a whole. Some usability guru (Jacob Nielsen?) has a long writeup on this somewhere. The index should be on the right (or more generally the most-clicked links shouldn't required positioning/navigating over little-used links to get to them).
  • Ted (unregistered)

    No offense, but this is some seriously ugly "web 2.0" crap. Seriously, my eyes are watering here.

  • (cs)

    0.1 actually looks pretty cool. Was that squiggly black/blue border an image, or pure CSS?

  • (cs)

    I was going to complain about the sidebar, but it seems it's actually last in the HTML, and positioned with style sheets, so there's no problem there.

    Looks fine. Degrades reasonably too.

    Addendum (2008-01-20 00:06): There's two things in the forums, though.

    1. Pages are rendered in a lime sort of color scheme, but then "snap back" to something that looks like the old version. CSS WTF?

    2. img src="blah.gif" alt=""

    Either use alt attributes or don't. The above is bogus, and results in 1x1 px large image placeholders. Which is bad, for example if you want to right-click and load one specific avatar.

    Opera 9.01.

  • Anonymous (unregistered) in reply to Irrelevant

    Ehh, I think there's one too many colors in the design for it to be really cohesive.

  • Giancarlo (unregistered)

    Please lets go back to the pen an paper look.

  • Giancarlo (unregistered) in reply to Giancarlo

    Its me again, i was thinking... finally a theme that goes with the website... WTF!!!! haha

  • Mye Auyes (unregistered)

    I thought I'd walked into Best Buy!

    Yikes.

    The layout is fine, the colors gotta go. Or change.

    Or something...

  • immibis (unregistered)

    If anyone wants some CSS to make it look like the old one (get the Stylish plugin for Firefox and use the CSS in that), email the following address: edud-retupmoc (backwards) AT (opposite of cold) mail.com

  • (cs)

    The new look is OK... Except for the part where the number of comments is even harder to read now. I really only care to read comments where there are only a small number there, but the featured comments are often not the best ones.

  • (cs)

    I'm not entirely comfortable with change. Can we go back to the 0.1 format?

  • Blah (unregistered)

    There is less colours in the Gretag Macbeth chart.

  • Jeff (unregistered)

    You'll get over it.

  • Cope with IT (unregistered)

    You wouldn't consider swapping the main content and navigarion area? Reading the articles is easier with the navigational stuff to the right (because you'd know when to stop looking for the beginning of the next line.

    And the greenish background for the "Submit you WTF" link which looks like a button really doesn't fit to the rest of the layout.

    That said: Looks good

  • (cs)

    OK, keep the articles on the right if you must, but please at least include a graphic of the edge of my monitor between the sidebar and the articles.

  • Pilum (unregistered) in reply to ComputerForumUser

    I'm sorry but this look is butt ugly compared to the old one in my opinion.

  • (cs)

    Green, blue and red... and no background colour? Just '97 grey?

    You may want to check out some other web design tools besides Geocities...

  • Daniel (unregistered)

    ...and think of the masses of Energy, which are saved by using the cool darker colors ;-)

  • zzo38 (unregistered)

    The new look isn't bad. But, you could add a client-skin (I think many sites should). A client-skin is when a XML file is sent to the client and the client uses XSLT to transform to a viewable XHTML document. You could store the URL of XSL file in a cookie. A forum software I am writing (called ndforum) does that (actually it does nothing now, because I haven't written it very much yet).

  • zzo38 (unregistered) in reply to Daniel
    Daniel:
    ...and think of the masses of Energy, which are saved by using the cool darker colors ;-)
    If you want to save energy using darker colors you should just decrease the brightness on monitor for making it dark. Of course if client-skin is implemented you could also change that, but even without client-skin, you could use a GreaseMonkey script to change the styles as well.
  • zzo38 (unregistered)

    Also, you should make it on the comment form you can do ALT+S send and ALT+P preview.

    You could see the http://zzo38computer.cjb.net/chrono/zzo38 see my weblog format if you want to (it is a simple format without CSS, XML, colors, background, etc), it doesn't support client-skin but ndforum will support that. Also I tell other people to add client-skin XML to other forum software but really they don't know.

  • (cs)

    Oh another thing, the yellow-green + blue is horrible and wants changing. But I like the blue - keep it. And I like the yellow-green - keep that too. Could you make it more purple though?

  • Jon (unregistered)

    Is it me, or is the page not valid XHTML?

  • (cs)

    I know! The real WTF is that this site does not adhere to Web standards!

    (By the way, who changed "advertissments" to "advertisments"? Maybe in 6.0 he will get it right...)

  • Variant does not contain an object (unregistered)

    Puke green. Kindergarten red. No way. Sorry. Bye.

  • Anonymous (unregistered)

    Wow, I actually like it. Good job :-)

  • (cs)

    I must say I would prefer the 0.1 version, would be the perfect fit. I do realize you'd need to hire additonal interns for that, though.

  • - (unregistered) in reply to real_aardvark
    real_aardvark:
    My only constructive comment is that I agree with the posters who find having the navigation bar on the left distinctly unnerving. Mind you, I'm not Arabic.

    I prefer the navigation bar on the right side too. My eyes get drawn to the menu each time I move them, so I have to consentrate more when reading long articles.

  • (cs)

    I'm a developer and I believe that most people who visit this site are as well. I think many developers would favor a simple yet tasteful design. Personally, I think this design is on the edge of both those traits. Maybe it is just me but those colors are not all that pleasing. You should do what I do and run the color scheme by your girlfriend/wife/random_female ahead of time. I often do this and many times it has saved me some embarrassment when I try to leave for work with pants that don't match my shirt.

Leave a comment on “Announcement: Yet Another New Look”

Log In or post as a guest

Replying to comment #:

Log Out

« Return to Article