Message boards :
News :
Web site upgrade
Message board moderation
Previous · 1 . . . 8 · 9 · 10 · 11 · 12 · 13 · 14 . . . 18 · Next
Author | Message |
---|---|
Richard Haselgrove Send message Joined: 4 Jul 99 Posts: 14649 Credit: 200,643,578 RAC: 874 |
I would argue this point. Other than the colors, the site looks almost the same on mobile phones in landscape mode. However, dark colors consume less energy than white, making darker colors better for mobile from a battery conservation perspective.Doesn't that depend whether the screen in question uses LED or LCD technology? LEDs emit light where it's needed - so your point would undoubtedly be true. But IIRC LCDs *block* light - emitted from a backlight - where it's *not* needed. No saving there. So, even on energy alone, you can't please all the people all the time. |
OzzFan Send message Joined: 9 Apr 02 Posts: 15691 Credit: 84,761,841 RAC: 28 |
I would argue this point. Other than the colors, the site looks almost the same on mobile phones in landscape mode. However, dark colors consume less energy than white, making darker colors better for mobile from a battery conservation perspective.Doesn't that depend whether the screen in question uses LED or LCD technology? LEDs emit light where it's needed - so your point would undoubtedly be true. But IIRC LCDs *block* light - emitted from a backlight - where it's *not* needed. No saving there. So, even on energy alone, you can't please all the people all the time. Good point, and you're right. Though isn't the future in LED and LCD is on it's way out? |
betreger Send message Joined: 29 Jun 99 Posts: 11360 Credit: 29,581,041 RAC: 66 |
Though isn't the future in LED and LCD is on it's way out? AFAIK OLED is the future. |
Jeff Buck Send message Joined: 11 Feb 00 Posts: 1441 Credit: 148,764,870 RAC: 0 |
I would argue this point. Other than the colors, the site looks almost the same on mobile phones in landscape mode.So you're saying that on phones, the scrolling required to view a given amount of text hasn't changed? On my PCs, it now takes close to 50% more scrolling to view the same amount of text, thanks to the font and line spacing changes needed to make it even marginally more legible. A refreshing and much needed change.An annoying and totally unnecessary change. If it ain't broke, don't fix it. Change for the sake of change is just plain dumb. A more modern look.As I said in a very early post on this topic, this reminds me of the blackboards and white chalk that we used to have in grade school 50+ years ago. I'm pretty sure "modern" usage, and not just in schools, consists of whiteboards with more easily readable black and colored markers. EDIT: I also remember many years of plugging away with the old 3270/3278 "dumb" terminals with their green text on a black background. I think most of us were quite happy when PCs came along and we could actually have dark text on a light background. That was a very welcome change. It seems a shame to revert to the dark ages. The truth is most people just don't like to have their cheese moved. Of course people are going to complain because people don't like change.Most of the issues raised have been very specific, not just generic complaints about change. If there was a need for specific changes, and the changes met that need, then I doubt you'd have much argument. As far as I can tell, nothing about this "upgrade" meets that criteria, especially if there are "small display" users who are irked right along with those of us trying to cope on more standard-size monitors. |
OzzFan Send message Joined: 9 Apr 02 Posts: 15691 Credit: 84,761,841 RAC: 28 |
I would argue this point. Other than the colors, the site looks almost the same on mobile phones in landscape mode.So you're saying that on phones, the scrolling required to view a given amount of text hasn't changed? On my PCs, it now takes close to 50% more scrolling to view the same amount of text, thanks to the font and line spacing changes needed to make it even marginally more legible. The amount of "scrolling" on a mobile phone feels about the same to me. I'm sure the extra scrolling on your mouse wheel will take it's toll. A refreshing and much needed change.An annoying and totally unnecessary change. If it ain't broke, don't fix it. Change for the sake of change is just plain dumb. Change for the sake of change is good. It keeps us from falling into ruts. It keeps things fresh and should happen more often in our lives. Changing doesn't mean "fixing", so the adage you offered doesn't apply. A more modern look.As I said in a very early post on this topic, this reminds me of the blackboards and white chalk that we used to have in grade school 50+ years ago. I'm pretty sure "modern" usage, and not just in schools, consists of whiteboards with more easily readable black and colored markers. Whiteboards also don't require energy like displays do. But whiteboards do require very specific lighting to be seen properly from all angles or you get glares. The truth is most people just don't like to have their cheese moved. Of course people are going to complain because people don't like change.Most of the issues raised have been very specific, not just generic complaints about change. If there was a need for specific changes, and the changes met that need, then I doubt you'd have much argument. As far as I can tell, nothing about this "upgrade" meets that criteria, especially if there are "small display" users who are irked right along with those of us trying to cope on more standard-size monitors. Tedious complaints are *always* specific. People will look for reasons to complain (see example above about not wanting to turn a mobile device sideways and calling it a "bad" solution). There's no point in countering the nitpicking because people will continue to find more excuses to complain. Ergo, all of my arguments stand except to those that don't want to hear opposing views. |
Jeff Buck Send message Joined: 11 Feb 00 Posts: 1441 Credit: 148,764,870 RAC: 0 |
Ergo, all of my arguments stand except to those that don't want to hear opposing views.Ditto. |
CElliott Send message Joined: 19 Jul 99 Posts: 178 Credit: 79,285,961 RAC: 0 |
Looks great, really professional. |
OzzFan Send message Joined: 9 Apr 02 Posts: 15691 Credit: 84,761,841 RAC: 28 |
Ergo, all of my arguments stand except to those that don't want to hear opposing views.Ditto. The difference is I'm more than willing to hear opposing views. I've read them all here in this thread. The complaints are all superficial, but people are posing them as technical in nature to rationalize their arguments with more weight. People don't like their cheese moved. |
Grant (SSSF) Send message Joined: 19 Aug 99 Posts: 13720 Credit: 208,696,464 RAC: 304 |
In my account, I notice the Location selector box suffers from the same oversize issue that the forum post order boxes previously displayed. Grant Darwin NT |
Kissagogo27 Send message Joined: 6 Nov 99 Posts: 715 Credit: 8,032,827 RAC: 62 |
Even for the texts , i've to use 75% zoom to have a good reading with SRware Iron , if not , all is too big ! perhaps the big problem on mobile phone ? (using old Iron33 because of a non SSE2 CPU / WinXP / CPU XP2800+ MB 8RDA3+ / 03' Radeon 9500 Sapphire / SyncMaster 171P 4/3 ) colors are better for my eyes , dark background is less aggressive , forget the old white paper sheets on computers :op all my XP windows backgrouds are set to #C3DDC4 colors , Nice isn't it ? |
JaundicedEye Send message Joined: 14 Mar 12 Posts: 5375 Credit: 30,870,693 RAC: 1 |
I guess I'm failing to follow the logic behind this 'upgrade'. S@H is a science research project designed to use personal computers for analyzing radio telescope data to discover reproducible signal results that might indicate extraterrestrial intelligence. The other projects under the BOINC umbrella also rely on distributive computing power to sift or analyze data for those projects. The stated objective of the upgrade was to make the BOINC pages more 'readable?' or display friendly on mobile devices. Every statistic available on BOINC that I have looked at reveals that mobile devices are very slow and inefficient at processing BOINC delivered data. Conversely the best processing speeds and results are by workstations and 'gamer' setups that usually have large 16:9 aspect displays......... My question being why the change to mostly benefit the less capable processing setups? What am I not seeing?............ "Sour Grapes make a bitter Whine." <(0)> |
OzzFan Send message Joined: 9 Apr 02 Posts: 15691 Credit: 84,761,841 RAC: 28 |
The original idea behind distributed computing was that many low powered devices could outperform a high-compute cluster costing millions of dollars (with low powered being loosely defined as compared to the top 500 compute clusters). It is the competitive nature of people that has encouraged this user-community to build high powered workstations for the sole purpose of crunching. This, of course, isn't discouraged but it goes well beyond the original idea. I think in many ways, with mobile devices becoming more common (laptops outselling desktops and phones selling at incredible rates), even if they are low powered when compared to high-end workstations, are still more akin to the original idea. In other words, it isn't about getting the most power out of a single device. It is about getting as many devices (and people) to participate in science. Many hardcore crunchers seem to lose sight of that idea in their competitive quest for high RACs. |
qbit Send message Joined: 19 Sep 04 Posts: 630 Credit: 6,868,528 RAC: 0 |
Hello again! Back here much sooner then expected;-) And also, when it comes to renowned faculties like UC Berkeley, I somehow rather expect bleeding edge technology. But maybe that's just me.
Hm, not sure, is it a SETI thing or a UCB thing? On bottom of the page it says "©2016 University of California". And is good forum software really that expensive? I really don't know. Anybody with more insight on this? Of course it helps, but it still looks worse then the "old" forum. Almost, yes. But some things look worse IMO. Let's take for example the start page, all you see there in landscape are the huge logos. But yeah, inside threads it's pretty much the same. BTW: That's really the evil part, because when you first open the new forum on a phone, in portrait mode, it really looks like it's optimized for mobile use. Maybe it is, but it's just that one page. Maybe that's also why I was so dissapointed the first time I saw it.
I doubt that to be honest. I rarely see anybody browse in portrait. I also think that I saw a study not long ago saying that about 85-90% browse in portrait on phones. Not really sure on the numbers and currently too lazy to look it up. But yes, it may be a bit egocentric to not wanna use landscape. I don't know, it just doesn't feel right for me.
I agree on your first two points. Yes, change was needed. The old forums really felt old and dated and I was hoping for an upgrade for a long time (which clearly makes me not part of the ppl who don't like change overall). And yes, less battery usage for AMOLED screens, that's nice, altough not a priority for me. My problem is your third point. A more modern look just for the sake? Why not a more modern software instead of just a more modern look? Give us selectable themes (at least 2, better 3,4,5), give us a mobile mode, give us polls, pic resizing, videos, emojies, better quoting (those bars look awful and you still can't see who is quoted). It's all pretty much standard those days. And I swear I can't remember ever using any other board which requieres placing url tags manually. And I strongly doubt they will do another upgrade in the near future, so we will have to put those tags even in 2020, LOL (if the project still exists then). And I wouldn't say that ppl just don't like change. Sure, some really don't, but many complains here are about the readability. While some (including myself) don't have a problem with readability on dark themes many ppl indeed have. It depends on many factors, like screen used, your age, your eyes, etc. I guess I'm failing to follow the logic behind this 'upgrade'. S@H is a science research project designed to use personal computers for analyzing radio telescope data to discover reproducible signal results that might indicate extraterrestrial intelligence. The other projects under the BOINC umbrella also rely on distributive computing power to sift or analyze data for those projects. Not everybody uses their crucher(s) to browse the forums |
kittyman Send message Joined: 9 Jul 00 Posts: 51468 Credit: 1,018,363,574 RAC: 1,004 |
It's hidden in the dark background...............look closer. LOL. Meow. "Freedom is just Chaos, with better lighting." Alan Dean Foster |
Jeff Buck Send message Joined: 11 Feb 00 Posts: 1441 Credit: 148,764,870 RAC: 0 |
"qbit" wrote: ...better quoting (those bars look awful and you still can't see who is quoted). It's all pretty much standard those days.Actually, as shown, it is possible to have the quoted poster's ID appear above the quote but, as with URLs, you have to manually add the user's ID to the BBC quote tag as 'quote="xxxxxxx"'. Might as well just type it into your new post. It certainly could be done automatically by the forum code, but that might actually qualify as an "upgrade", What a concept! |
OzzFan Send message Joined: 9 Apr 02 Posts: 15691 Credit: 84,761,841 RAC: 28 |
Hm, not sure, is it a SETI thing or a UCB thing? On bottom of the page it says "©2016 University of California". BOINC and BOINC Forums are copyrighted to UC Berkeley. Funding is provided through grants and private funding. I don't understand how switching to landscape is a bad solution. That's how most mobile users browse. http://thomaspark.co/2011/10/in-portrait-or-landscape/ http://www.uxmatters.com/mt/archives/2013/02/how-do-users-really-hold-mobile-devices.php The first link indicates that 64% of people use their phone in landscape mode most of the time. It seems only natural to me to view things in landscape mode when browsing the web. It's the way I prefer to browse and text. My problem is your third point. A more modern look just for the sake? Why not? Seems as good a reason as any. Remember, these are my reasons. I don't speak for the project staff. And I'm perfectly OK with change for the sake of change. Why not a more modern software instead of just a more modern look? Give us selectable themes (at least 2, better 3,4,5), give us a mobile mode, give us polls, pic resizing, videos, emojies, better quoting (those bars look awful and you still can't see who is quoted). It's all pretty much standard those days. And I swear I can't remember ever using any other board which requieres placing url tags manually. And I strongly doubt they will do another upgrade in the near future, so we will have to put those tags even in 2020, LOL (if the project still exists then). Lack of development resources and money. And time better spent on other things. And I wouldn't say that ppl just don't like change. Sure, some really don't, but many complains here are about the readability. While some (including myself) don't have a problem with readability on dark themes many ppl indeed have. It depends on many factors, like screen used, your age, your eyes, etc. Sure, those are valid points about age, screen, eyesight, etc. But I stand by my statements about people and change. Every change I see happen on this forum, a flood of complaints come pouring in. Truly trivial changes bring out such angry messages from people. |
ML1 Send message Joined: 25 Nov 01 Posts: 20147 Credit: 7,508,002 RAC: 20 |
OK... Summary so far for my 'experience'...
See new freedom: Mageia Linux Take a look for yourself: Linux Format The Future is what We all make IT (GPLv3) |
kittyman Send message Joined: 9 Jul 00 Posts: 51468 Credit: 1,018,363,574 RAC: 1,004 |
I suppose it would require a total rewrite, but......dreaming...... And, I am not a coder, so I am 'assuming' this could be done. It would be cool if the site code was kind of a 'template' and the user was given a number of options for the color scheme they desired. Then the chosen color scheme would 'fill in the blanks' in the code, allowing the user to try or change the look as they desired. New color schemes should be easy to create at that point, because you would just be compiling a table of what colors to use where. Perhaps the user could even have access to create their own table of colors to use. "Freedom is just Chaos, with better lighting." Alan Dean Foster |
OzzFan Send message Joined: 9 Apr 02 Posts: 15691 Credit: 84,761,841 RAC: 28 |
Your suggestions are totally doable, the problem is with development time to write code to do all that, debug and test. Perhaps if they could get a student in website design to help out, they could help the project by coding a new site and they could use their work in a portfolio to build their resume. |
Jeff Buck Send message Joined: 11 Feb 00 Posts: 1441 Credit: 148,764,870 RAC: 0 |
kittyman wrote: I suppose it would require a total rewrite, but......dreaming......If you follow that link in the thread's very first post, to Darkly, then click on the Themes dropdown, you'll see that there are already quite a few other possibilities already built into the toolkit. How difficult it would be to make them user-selectable is the $64 question . I think the demo pages are all just separately pre-configured stand-alone pages. The demo just makes it look like the theme is changing on the fly. |
©2024 University of California
SETI@home and Astropulse are funded by grants from the National Science Foundation, NASA, and donations from SETI@home volunteers. AstroPulse is funded in part by the NSF through grant AST-0307956.