I don't like the new look...

[Skippermark]

we have one side yelling that it won't view well in 800x600...and then that one side we just don't talk about.

 

I didn't realize people still used 800x600.

 

Yes, let's not talk about the third side. They're like the family members you don't talk about.

[+Bambography]

So the map is working again for me.

 

I really do appreciate all the work you guys are doing to get the site running smoother, but I have to ask, why move the little map? It was far more logical where it was in the box with other location info. I think these tweeks are starting to go one step to far. Surely there are better things to be getting on with?

[Jeremy]

So the map is working again for me.

 

I really do appreciate all the work you guys are doing to get the site running smoother, but I have to ask, why move the little map? It was far more logical where it was in the box with other location info. I think these tweeks are starting to go one step to far. Surely there are better things to be getting on with?

 

Spacing is the biggest issue. It looks fine on larger browsers but we're trying to accommodate smaller browsers as well.

[+Raine]

Its one of those balance things where we have one side yelling that it won't view well in 800x600 and then the other side not liking the map period and then that one side we just don't talk about.

 

-Raine

 

I was thinking about pulling out my old Commodore 64, or my Vic 20... do you think you can reengineer the site so that it looks good on my monochrome monitors?

 

You would need to send me you're vic 20 so I can

 

1. remember how I got into coding and

2. be able to 'test'

 

[BRTango]

Its one of those balance things where we have one side yelling that it won't view well in 800x600 and then the other side not liking the map period and then that one side we just don't talk about.

 

-Raine

 

I was thinking about pulling out my old Commodore 64, or my Vic 20... do you think you can reengineer the site so that it looks good on my monochrome monitors?

 

You would need to send me you're vic 20 so I can

 

1. remember how I got into coding and

2. be able to 'test'

 

 

[+Beaverbeliever]

I also do not like "Owner's Description:" above my cache description.

Yeah. I don't quite get that either. Like its somebody else's description.

[+Bambography]

So the map is working again for me.

 

I really do appreciate all the work you guys are doing to get the site running smoother, but I have to ask, why move the little map? It was far more logical where it was in the box with other location info. I think these tweeks are starting to go one step to far. Surely there are better things to be getting on with?

 

Spacing is the biggest issue. It looks fine on larger browsers but we're trying to accommodate smaller browsers as well.

Would it not make more sense for the map to be with the location info and for the downloads to go into the menu on the right where 'Send to Phone' used to be? A small downloads menu would work ok over there, and surely if Log Your Visit (the main thing anyone will do on a cache page) only gets a small link how come 'Send to GPS' gets such preferable treatment?

[+Bambography]

I'm probably worng with this, but didn't the right navigation used to cut into the cache page. I'm no expert on tables so don't know if it possible, but if there wasn't an empty column under the menu it would save loads of empty space. I'm done a quick knock-up to show what I mean but didn't move the map or downloads round (as I would do)

[Jeremy]

I'm probably worng with this, but didn't the right navigation used to cut into the cache page.

 

It did, which was causing issues on different browsers that "squish" the data. With variable length navigation bars you can't just cut off a place at the end of navigation and say "this is where it goes widescreen." So the alternative is to stick the description in the center bar.

 

Future designs will move the left nav to the top. This will make the center bar not as skinny and, therefore, more handsome.

[+edscott]

Today I printed out 24 cache pages to restock some of my files for future road trips. Yes I do need paper.. gotta have something to take into the woods if you expect to find a cache Anyhow, 22 of them printed out fine and after I add a map as a back page they are ready to use. However for some reason 2 of them ran off the right edge of the paper cutting off the map (no great loss ) some of the text, the Navigation selections, the inventory and the waypoint. All were done with the same computer and printer. Both the problem pages were by the some hider, but I printed two others by her and they worked OK. Is this related to the sizing issues above, or a totally different bug?

 

PS.. just tried it here at home and they are fine.. good ol' MAC.. GC12M6Z and GC12M75

Edited June 5, 2007 by edscott

[Skippermark]

Future designs will move the left nav to the top. This will make the center bar not as skinny and, therefore, more handsome.

 

Would it be possible to create a "user customizable layout" like Yahoo and some of the other portals have, where each user can drag and drop different modules around and put them where they want? I think most of those settings are saved on the server because they appear the same no matter what computer you're on as long as you're logged in to that site.

 

There could be a deafult layout, but then each person could tweak it to exactly the way they like to suit their needs and monitor size.

[+icefall5]

I rather like all of the changes on the site. The only thing I don't like is the fact that there are two maps. You really only need one!

 

If you want to see archives of how the old site looked, and even be able to navigate around the old one, try this site. If you go there, make a point of clicking on the November 9, 2000 page, because neither the October 17 nor the October 19 links work.

Edited June 6, 2007 by icefall5

[vtmtnman]

I rather like all of the changes on the site. The only thing I don't like is the fact that there are two maps. You really only need one!

 

If you want to see archives of how the old site looked, and even be able to navigate around the old one, try this site. If you go there, make a point of clicking on the November 9, 2000 page, because neither the October 17 nor the October 19 links work.

Wow now thats cool.The links even work.I see in 2000 you guys were listing new caches.I'm sure back then it was big news to have a new cache to find when there was only like 300 members.

[Alan White]

One further point on the location of the map. Because the map takes time to load then the navigation links first appear at the top right. So you go to click on "Log your visit" or whatever, and by the time you've got there the map has appeared so you click on the map instead . BTDT

 

What about putting the map below the navigation links? This solves the above problem (but not for clicking on the inventory) and also puts the map level with the coords thus keeping two related pieces of information near to each other.

[+Lil Devil]

What about putting the map below the navigation links? This solves the above problem (but not for clicking on the inventory) and also puts the map level with the coords thus keeping two related pieces of information near to each other.

Yes, please!

[+j9cache & Mike(j9+M)]

I appreciate the staff working to improve the site. My one dislike with the current page is the placement of the maps. I like the placement of the detailed map at the top of the page on the old print-friendly version. This is the most useful of the two maps. It now prints at the bottom of the page (at best) or on subsequent pages, depending on the length of cache description. This places the map on a different page from the cache coordinates. I would prefer these two pieces of information to be placed together at the top of the cache page.

 

I agree about map placement. Since I do not like to go paperless, I print out my caches "print friendly", and usually try to get it on 1 page. The detailed map is on the 2nd page. It would be nice if the detailed map appeared at the top of the page, on page 1.

[+SUBYDAZZ]

I am very frustrated with the new look, I think it's not well thought out or executed. When I go caching I used to select and copy all the details of the cache into a word processor so I could print them out, and delete the information I didn't need, like the links to download, disclaimers, quick links in the left pane and decryption boxes - a simple job and this would save a lot of paper & ink. Now you can't do that at all, the formatting won't fit on a normal page, they have columns and weird spacings and it's way too hard to do the same thing now. In fact I've decided to cancel a caching trip I had planned because I can't print all the details I need in the few hours I had allocated.

 

The Print friendly one isn't - you don't get attributes, the cache size is now only an image not in text (harder to interpret easily), and why you'd want to print out the parts that say "Make this page print-friendly (show 5 logs)", "Print PDF", "Download" and "Send to Phone"?

 

The text font also changes, and I find it harder to read.

 

The Maps are also a waste of bandwidth and space:

 

 

 

What good are these? They serve almost no use.

 

Please tell me there will be some changes made to fix these issues, it has gone from being a really good cache page to one that is awful.

[+mini cacher]

Now I know how the developers of Vista felt

That arguement would only make sense if everytime I turned my computer on, the Vista developers had made some random UI change by either moving my desktop icons, changing my background or making my screen saver kick on at a different time. Seeing the site change and fluctuate on an hourly basis was very annoying. It looked horid at first... got a bit better... got worse... better.... then worse again... now it just looks so-so. It was like seeing the site change as if we were viewing a developers machine... yet this was a production server. bad practive if you ask me... no that you did.

 

I have to agree that the embedded maps are of little or no use to me. I almost always click the link to go directly to Google maps when I need a map. Given a profile option to turn the maps off, I would use it.

[+kewfriend]

Its getting much much better - beginning to like the new look

[+K-SQUARED]

I have really enjoyed reading all of your posts in this thread regarding the new changes, and what people do and do not like about all the new changes. I am getting used to the new look, but still think there is room for improvement.

 

For example, I do not like the huge box under the cache name and stats. I think most of the info in that box under "Download" needs to go over to the right into the Navigation area. Click here to do this, click there to do that, etc.

 

I suggest putting the following buttons in the Navigation box:

Send to GPS

Send to Phone

GPX eXchange File

Location Waypoint File

 

You could even move the printing options over to the right side of the Navigation area, nd change the tital of that area to "Cache Options."

 

And, to beat a dead horse, why do we need another map? If you want a map, click on it below the cache description. So, I suggest that you remove the "in [state], US [view map]"

 

And, like I brought up in another thread, remove the [Temporarily Disable] button under the cache name. We can do that from the navigation area on the right side of the cache page.

 

So, what I am suggesting is basically this, the top of the cache page should contain:

Cache Name

Cache Owner (not "a cache by", it's obviously a cache...)

Date Hidden

Cache Coordinates

Cache Type

D/T Ratings

 

The rest of all that 'stuff' can go over to the right. The top of the cache page looks too cluttered now, with too many buttons to click. The cover of a novel only has the title and author on the front.

 

I have put together an example of what I am suggesting, but I am not sure how to post it here in the forums. I copied and pasted and edited the page in MS Word.

 

-Kevin

[+MissJenn]

I am very frustrated with the new look, I think it's not well thought out or executed. When I go caching I used to select and copy all the details of the cache into a word processor so I could print them out, and delete the information I didn't need

Have you seen this thread? Print Friendly Pages

[+Driver Carries Cache]

For example, I do not like the huge box under the cache name and stats. I think most of the info in that box under "Download" needs to go over to the right into the Navigation area. Click here to do this, click there to do that, etc.

 

I suggest putting the following buttons in the Navigation box:

Send to GPS

Send to Phone

GPX eXchange File

Location Waypoint File

 

You could even move the printing options over to the right side of the Navigation area, nd change the tital of that area to "Cache Options."

 

 

From a usability perspective, that is not something you want to do. Mixing the site related nav (take me here) with "action items" (download or print this) destroys the delineation between the two. They are completely different things and should not be bunched together. I guess I'm fortunate to have an Information Architect on the payroll in our office that's taught me lots of these lessons, which I pass on to my clients.

 

DCC

[+mini cacher]

For example, I do not like the huge box under the cache name and stats. I think most of the info in that box under "Download" needs to go over to the right into the Navigation area. Click here to do this, click there to do that, etc.

 

I suggest putting the following buttons in the Navigation box:

Send to GPS

Send to Phone

GPX eXchange File

Location Waypoint File

 

You could even move the printing options over to the right side of the Navigation area, nd change the tital of that area to "Cache Options."

 

 

From a usability perspective, that is not something you want to do. Mixing the site related nav (take me here) with "action items" (download or print this) destroys the delineation between the two. They are completely different things and should not be bunched together. I guess I'm fortunate to have an Information Architect on the payroll in our office that's taught me lots of these lessons, which I pass on to my clients.

 

DCC

Those actions are not much different than the "bookmark listing", "ignore listing" and "watch listing" links already on the right. Those are actions as well... not really "take me here" links. Clicking on the "send to phone" button goes to a page to enter some info before you can continue... kind of like "bookmark listing". They are all ways to interact with the cache page. "Site Navigation" is on the left... "Cache Navigation" is on the right. Since the nav links and everything on the right hand side creates the column of dead white space that goes all the way down, I like the idea of moving more of the cache page actions over to the right so the actual cache info is higher up on the page. That would also get rid of the other huge dead white space that sits next to the "download" buttons. but thats just my opinion.

[+chaosmanor]

I'll be blunt; I can put up with all of the changes that I don't like (which doesn't even mention that I like many of them), but having the Yahoo! map scrunched way to the left is ugly. The "Find xxx cache..." links are all squoze together, and hard to read. The Yahoo! map should be right-justified. It shouldn't make a difference what browser anyone is using; this simple step should work in all of them. Right now, it looks terrible in both Firefox and Internet Imploder, on all three of our machines, which have different-sized monitors; two of them use 1068 by 768, and one uses 800x600. Yes, smaller monitors work better at 800x600, especially for those of us with older eyes. This for the youngsters on the site who haven't yet learned that eyes get weak as one ages. You whippersnappers'll find out, heh heh heh

[+PapaDean]

 

After almost 20 years in Healthcare IT dealing with vendor systems and internal development, I have to chuckle about all of the "outrage" about the changes in the forums and the fact that this is the "production" environment!

 

P.S. Raine, if you think this is bad -- at least some of your users are not DOCTORS!

 

Don't be too sure about that. We're everywhere!

[+pghlooking]

My biggest complaint is the coordinates are too small. That's probably the most vital info on the page and it is small text. At least the size of the cache name would be helpful.

 

Also could there be a way to toggle the caches on and off when you click on the map. Some of these areas are so congested that you can't see anything but numbered balloons.

Edited June 14, 2007 by pghlooking

[+BigCarbonFootprint]

Everything is now either broken, looks bad or doesn't exist anymore. (Everything is not an exageration). Just look at all the new forum posts in the last week or two.

 

Thereby forcing you to have to re-discover how to do things or press dozens of keystrokes and links to do everything you used to be able to do.

 

I just canceled my premium membership subscription (monthly) and WILL NOT pay again until the hampsters at geocaching.com stop messing around with THE LOOK of everything.

 

Perhaps they should not have ever fixed the servers, then they wouldn't have all this free time to screw around with all of us.

 

Dude!! Relax!! It's not that big of a deal. Change happens... flow with it.

 

It's just a new look that will settle down to a normal state soon enough. Change is a good thing... just let it wash over you and soak it all in!!

 

What would you expect from a less than 0.5 % hide to find ratio.

[+Lake Hunter]

I am very frustrated with the new look, I think it's not well thought out or executed. When I go caching I used to select and copy all the details of the cache into a word processor so I could print them out, and delete the information I didn't need, like the links to download, disclaimers, quick links in the left pane and decryption boxes - a simple job and this would save a lot of paper & ink. Now you can't do that at all, the formatting won't fit on a normal page, they have columns and weird spacings and it's way too hard to do the same thing now. In fact I've decided to cancel a caching trip I had planned because I can't print all the details I need in the few hours I had allocated.

 

The Print friendly one isn't - you don't get attributes, the cache size is now only an image not in text (harder to interpret easily), and why you'd want to print out the parts that say "Make this page print-friendly (show 5 logs)", "Print PDF", "Download" and "Send to Phone"?

 

The text font also changes, and I find it harder to read.

 

The Maps are also a waste of bandwidth and space:

 

 

 

What good are these? They serve almost no use.

 

Please tell me there will be some changes made to fix these issues, it has gone from being a really good cache page to one that is awful.

[+superhoser]

Over all I like all the changes, I only wish you still had the option to see archived caches on the maps.

[+DaleW2001]

I'm always one for innovation, but some recent changes to the site are not making me happy! First, I really miss the link to look up a zip code on the Seek a Cache page. ZIP Codes are my primary way of finding caches where I am going!

 

Also, on the printer-friendly versions of cache pages, there seems to be no way to include previous logs on the printout.

 

The former look of the cache printouts worked better for me. Hopefully there is a happy medium somewhere out there.

 

Thanks for listening!