SITE BUGS/REQUESTS: Consolidation Thread

ScottW

ScottW

Founder
Staff member
This is the offical SITE BUG Consolidation thread. This is the official thread to post issues related to bugs or requests. If a new thread starts that should be under here, moderators will merge it into this thread. After all, such reporting should be done here.

My GOAL is to tackle most of the bugs in the next two weeks. Most bugs are a result of the latest site change/mod/upgrade.

TECHS - Post Volunteer Tech area bugs/ideas to the Volunteer Forum. They are off topic in this thread.

Hopefully, we can re-hash and consolidate all issues into this thread and this will be the thread to keep track of those change/fixes and see if others are having the same issue.

--- GO HERE TO REVIEW BUGS AND POST BUGS OR REQUESTS ---
http://www.macosx.com/forums/vbugs.php

Thanks!
 
I know you have poo-pooed the idea in the past but it would be nice to get away from the absolute sizes in the layout. That would make both little screen and big screen people happy. I just notice it because I run 50% mobile 50% cinema display and the fixed approach is just that little bit suboptimal on both.
 
Hm. I think just adding a narrower theme would not do it justice... I for one am using a browser window-width of 924 pixels. Only a variable table width is _really_ gonna look good on that. :)
 
Variable width is not really an option. Im a sucker for experience. I can't control experience on self-adjusting layouts. I personally hate self-adjusting layouts. I think they are poor design.
 
There is a Gallery problem too. Some users can see larger images in the Desktops Gallery while some user can view the larger pictures. To give you a specific the error says :

Satcomer, you do not have permission to access this page. This could be due to one of several reasons:

Your user account may not have sufficient privileges to access this page. Are you trying to edit someone else's post, access administrative features or some other privileged system?
If you are trying to post, the administrator may have disabled your account, or it may be awaiting activation.
Click to expand...
 
Hm. I think if you design them correctly, you _can_ control variable width designs. I'm a sucker for design, and I think fixed width pages are poor design. (They think in boxes...) :p ... But I can always agree to disagree. ;)
 
:)

Name one thing, outside a browser window that is typically desgined by a designer that must be designed to expand and contract changing the physical layout of the design.

Print media? No
Video Media? No
 
Funny I have done lots and lots technical print work and it was all based on expanding and contracting within the physical layout. But it does take a certain familiarity to appreciate beautiful mathematics.

Also the web ain't print and it ain't video.

Kids these days, mumble... mumble...
 
Print and video are usually for FIXED RESOLUTION media. We're talking webbrowsers here. On Windows, you can safely assume that more than 50% of the users are using their browsers full screen at 1024*768. On Mac OS X (and we're basically only talking about the latter), people are using windows of any size, but practically _never_ at 1024*768. So, designing for one or two fixed sizes seems rather pointless.
 
Well, I know a bunch of folks with wide-screen TVs and unless they are watching a show in wide-format, it doesn't fit their screen. Makes NO SENSE why anyone would broadcast a fixed width video signal. What about the people without the wide screen, part of the picture is cut off.

What is going on w/ this world these days? Those fixed width and no-fixed width factions are just enraging the world.
 
Patience is a virtue. :) I am working on a thinner site that it will be better or at least a user selectable option.
 
ScottW said:
Variable width is not really an option. Im a sucker for experience. I can't control experience on self-adjusting layouts. I personally hate self-adjusting layouts. I think they are poor design.
Click to expand...
Hmm. I hate to disagree, but....I REALLY disagree. As a user, I absolutely hate it when web designers try to control my experience. It's an insult, and it just makes the design screw up for me, because I invariably have settings that the designer did not consider (window size, minimum font size, etc.). More and more pages these days are downright illegible for me, mostly because designers feel it's their right to micromanage the user's experience with absolute-positioned elements, fixed width, and hard-coded font sizes (which are overrided by my personal settings, thus causing major problems).

I'm happy to say that this site does NOT suffer from such extremes — it's perfectly legible. But I still object to the philosophy, and I still find it a little insulting. Computers, and by extension, web design, should be user-centric. (If I didn't hold that basic value, I never would have started using Macs in the first place.) When developers try to take control of MY experience away from ME, it's like they're saying "you and the way you work are not important".

There's a fine line between a "sucker for experience" (which is great) and a "control freak" (which is not).

As for video.....let's keep it relevant. Obviously video is not dynamic content, so obviously it must be a fixed size. If you're using TV as your inspiration, then you might as well make a whole web page — text and all — a giant JPEG. TV is by nature a developer-centric medium. (And aside from that, most DVD Players DO allow you to change the size of movies to fill your entire screen. It's usually stupid, since it goes against the nature of the medium, but the option is there for users, and that's a good thing.)


As for the new look of the pages, I'm still on the fence. I do find it hard to read now, but that could just be because I haven't gotten used to it yet. I'll have to give it time.
 
Lt Major Burns said:
but... don't we all have 30" widescreens? ¬_¬
Click to expand...

If you don't, you should upgrade. ;) I guess I should too if I want to eat my own words. :)
 
i have to say, after a good few hours, my visual training is still telling me that there is far too much horizontal stuff. the eye has to search the page much more intensively for the content that is relevant (the post) and seperate it from the content which is a lot less relevant (the user info) than the standard way. the bars drew the eye to the post, letting you actively decide if you want to see the member's post count etc, whereas now you have to conciously ignore it.
 
The previous layout of the threads before this seemed to flow much better when reading through them. Now with the user information on the top taking up most of the page it seems to break up that flow. Personally, it's quite obtrusive and I'm hoping that it does go back to the previous state.
 
You can now decide if you want the horizontal format or vertical format. horizontal is the new default format, vertical is considered a legacy format.

It's in the "Edit Profile" bottom option in the UserCP.

While I agree, vertical is much better on the wide-format... I am preparing to do away with the current wide format in favor a thinner view. I hate having two themes to support and so I just decided it was best to go thinner.

(see I listen)

Anyhow, obviously, some folks will be upset at this, but whatever. Down the road maybe run two. But not now.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top