Forum software update

[newtonfox]

but what has that got to do with this??

:icon_lol::icon_lol::icon_lol:

 

[Jeff]

No good, Jeff! I can see what you're trying to do but on a wide screen laptop there is now little more than 1 message on the screen at a time.

This is the default setting, I've always had it to the old setting because I prefer it that way, I just changed it to put the user details at the top to see what the reaction was. About to change it back.

 

[Boy Genius]

I feel sick

you seen Bocs picture as well then?

 

[Yorkshire Vixen]

aah, thats better!!

 

[Boy Genius]

aah, thats better!!

we can all calm down now

 

[City Fan]

Why should people not respond when opinion has been requested?

Don't mind opinions, can't stand constant moans and whines. You all sound like my fecking mother! :icon_wink

No doubt Jeffrey will be forced to put it back to how it was seeing as most people are scared of a bit of change.

 

[newtonfox]

aah, thats better!!

That box to the right is still there though :icon_sad:

 

[Melton Fox]

You all sound like my fecking mother! :icon_wink

No we don't.

 

[Boy Genius]

You all sound like my fecking mother! :icon_wink

quote]

No we don't.

OH no, Melton knows his mother, City Fan Melton could be your old man!

 

[Jeff]

I don't like the "latest threads" box on the right that causes the actual reading area to be shrunk in width.

Seconded.

It's OK on my widescreen laptop but a pita on my more orthodox desktop machine.

Just checked my PC and it really is shit.

I shall return to TB once this ghastly 'thing' on the side has been removed.

Do you really not like it, or is it just because you're not used to it?


It was a deliberate thing to reduce the width of the text area, I find the standard setting too wide, so I'm trying to find the best solution.

The human eye can read things much more efficiently in smaller columns, text that is too wide is more difficult and takes longer to read.
Apparently the optimum line length is around 12 words. That's why the vast majority of websites don't have text across the full width of the page.


What screen resolutions are you using if you're finding it a problem?


I will be able to set up an alternative forum style that uses the full width, but it won't include any of the other stuff I'm planning to include in the column on the right.

 

[Boy Genius]

Do you really not like it, or is it just because you're not used to it?


It was a deliberate thing to reduce the width of the text area, I find the standard setting too wide, so I'm trying to find the best solution.

The human eye can read things much more efficiently in smaller columns, text that is too wide is more difficult and takes longer to read.
Apparently the optimum line length is around 12 words. That's why the vast majority of websites don't have text across the full width of the page.


What screen resolutions are you using if you're finding it a problem?


I will be able to set up an alternative forum style that uses the full width, but it won't include any of the other stuff I'm planning to include in the column on the right.

I cannot see any problem with the stuff on the right hand side. They just love to moan Jeff.

 

[Singth]

I love it - absolutely love it!

 

[highland fox]

I cannot see any problem with the stuff on the right hand side. They just love to moan Jeff.

I never noticed it until now

 

[City Fan]

I prefer the smaller width text area, so have no problem with the box on the right. However, I'm using a pretty big widescreen monitor at 1680x1050 resolution so not sure how well it would look on a smaller screen.

 

[Nottingham Fox]

I never noticed it until now

Jeeesus ... I shall be keeping a very close eye on the Cheltenham Tipster comp :icon_wink

 

[bocadillo]

Do you really not like it, or is it just because you're not used to it?


It was a deliberate thing to reduce the width of the text area, I find the standard setting too wide, so I'm trying to find the best solution.

The human eye can read things much more efficiently in smaller columns, text that is too wide is more difficult and takes longer to read.
Apparently the optimum line length is around 12 words. That's why the vast majority of websites don't have text across the full width of the page.


What screen resolutions are you using if you're finding it a problem?

As I said before, on wide-screen it is OK but on any 4:3 resolution monitor it makes the messages very 'squeezed up'. I guess it would be better if you could create separate styles which were appropriate to each of the two monitor ratios - but this wouldn't solve the problem for people (like me) who regularly use the same username on both types of monitior.

 

[bocadillo]

Jeeesus ... I shall be keeping a very close eye on the Cheltenham Tipster comp :icon_wink

eh?

 

[Jeff]

As I said before, on wide-screen it is OK but on any 4:3 resolution monitor it makes the messages very 'squeezed up'. I guess it would be better if you could create separate styles which were appropriate to each of the two monitor ratios - but this wouldn't solve the problem for people (like me) who regularly use the same username on both types of monitior.

What resolution is your 4:3 display?

I've tested it using 1280 and 1024 pixel widths, and it looks fine to me. On 800 width half the column on the right is off the screen, so it only has a small impact on the page - and hardly anyone uses 800 or less these days anyway. This is using Firefox, maybe it's different in IE.

 

[newtonfox]

What resolution is your 4:3 display?

I've tested it using 1280 and 1024 pixel widths, and it looks fine to me. On 800 width half the column on the right is off the screen, so it only has a small impact on the page - and hardly anyone uses 800 or less these days anyway. This is using Firefox, maybe it's different in IE.

its the same jeff i use Firefox on the pc and IE on the laptop

 

[bocadillo]

What resolution is your 4:3 display?

I've tested it using 1280 and 1024 pixel widths, and it looks fine to me. On 800 width half the column on the right is off the screen, so it only has a small impact on the page - and hardly anyone uses 800 or less these days anyway. This is using Firefox, maybe it's different in IE.

Both desktop and laptop are 1280 - but the proportions look wrong on the 4:3 and the screen would normally be further away so it does seem to make a difference.