Posted by
cal, 14:39, 27th February 2002:
Woo. back with a new design.
Posted by
Sul, 17:11, 27th February 2002:
no offence Cal but it seems a little bland.
Posted by
Sul, 17:12, 27th February 2002:
Warning: Supplied argument is not a valid MySQL result resource in /usr/www/users/cal/iamcal.com/topic.php on line 21
[snipped by cal]
and this came up as well
Posted by
cal, 17:17, 27th February 2002:
seems like php has some odd settings on this server. fixed now though.
Posted by
cal, 17:20, 27th February 2002:
it's supposed to be quite bland, but i'm not entirely happy with it yet.
what are your suggestions?
Posted by
cal, 17:29, 27th February 2002:
let's just test some symbols to be sure...
'"?.!"£$%^&*(){}:@~?,./;'#[]_+-=|\
Posted by
pete, 17:31, 27th February 2002:
mmm... reminds me of a t-shirt of mine. i like it but... it's not as easy to follow as the old design... add some pictures?
Posted by
scott-s, 21:07, 27th February 2002:
Liked the old one better like.
Posted by
Suzie, 21:26, 27th February 2002:
It's hard to use, I don't mind it, but I think you're taking the minimalism too far..
It's not easy to automatically see which topics have new posts for example.. no visual clues, just text.. Also I don't like the text being so far over to the left of the screen.. seems a little unbalanced.
Posted by
la, 22:05, 27th February 2002:
yeah, it's a bit of a shock Cal...
but hey, it's your site, so you can do whatever you want with it =)
Posted by
reitsma, 22:32, 27th February 2002:
woah.
there's almost
too much balance going on here, cal.
it's hard to put it into words exactly.
the eye isn't drawn to any particular part of the page - it wonders where the
real content is.
when i saw your site, i was totally disoriented, and at first i thought it was the new design, but then i realised that when you launched your last design, i was comfortable with it instantly - it was easy to identify the main page content, and main page navigation/links.
the way that the discussion topics have grown in popularity, it does make sense to give it more real estate, but i'm not sure that it belongs there, like that.
there needs, IMHO, more distinction between the blogs and the links than just bullet points.
maybe lines, more likely a different font colour (light grey?).
i think a different font size (smaller) wouldn't do any harm either.
nice effort though, you really are an advocate for the boundless possibilities presented by non-image html.
i find it hard to get use to .. like ther eis to much writing on a page. But who am I to say anything ... my own page sucks.
Posted by
reitsma, 00:14, 28th February 2002:
november - um... you're a web user. that's who you are to say something.
i don't even have a site of my own, but i've looked at sites - thousands of them, as have you, no doubt.
whether or not you can make a site that generates hits of "iamcal" levels is not the point - you know what you like, and what you don't, so if you have a useful opinion, why not give it?
Posted by
reitsma, 00:46, 28th February 2002:
hey cal - it seems that your search is kinda funky - in particular, it replaces $1 with the words it is supposed to highlight.
:o)
Posted by
ell, 07:29, 28th February 2002:
/me prefers the old aesthetics
Posted by
cal, 08:43, 28th February 2002:
i've fixed the search. strange php setup on this server doesn't automatically create back reference variables.