Gc.com's New Look

[+TotemLake]

I haven't had much time to beta test and it looks like everybody else is catching the little gotcha's that pop up when you do something like this, but I just wanted to add my "It looks great" comment to this thread.

 

It's a good change and very easy on the eyes. Nice work Jeremy et al.

[+Menagerie]

First of all I like the new look. That being said, the new layout makes it necessary to use the horizontal scroll bar on some of my machines. I suspect that those with smaller screens or who don't have the capability (or know-how) to increase resolution are having to use the horizontal scroll bar alot. In my humble opinion, a web page has a better design feel when the creator is able to avoid the horizontal scroll bar, even for users of older machines/screens. I can simply solve my problem by using my newer machines and avoiding the "hand-me-downs" I've given to my kids. I am not sure everyone has that luxery.

 

Oops, punctuation edit.

Edited February 19, 2005 by Menagerie

[+Hemlock]

In my humble opinion, a web page has a better design feel when the creator is able to avoid the horizontal scroll bar, even for users of older machines/screens.

I just looked at several cache pages and in most cases was able to size the windows down to 575 pixels wide without having the scrollbar appear. Since pretty much every computer larger than a PDA is going to have at least a 640x480 screen, this is quite reasonable.

 

The only cache page that had a scrollbar at larger widths had a large image on the page. IMO hiders should not use large images on their pages not only because of the horizontal scrolling issue, but also because some people still use a dial-up connection.

[+southdeltan]

In my humble opinion, a web page has a better design feel when the creator is able to avoid the horizontal scroll bar, even for users of older machines/screens.

I just looked at several cache pages and in most cases was able to size the windows down to 575 pixels wide without having the scrollbar appear. Since pretty much every computer larger than a PDA is going to have at least a 640x480 screen, this is quite reasonable.

I was thinking the same thing (about the resolution). I'm at 800x600 on a 17inch monitor. My computer is 3 or 4 years old now. The only resolution lower is the 640x480. There are a lot of higher resolutions, however. I figured I was one of the few people not using a higher resolution. Most webpages seem to be aimed at larger resolutions. I've noticed many that auto-resize no matter what.

 

The only cache page that had a scrollbar at larger widths had a large image on the page. IMO hiders should not use large images on their pages not only because of the horizontal scrolling issue, but also because some people still use a dial-up connection.

 

Another reason to not like those images in the background :>

 

(I read somewhere that half of internet users in the US are still on dialup, not sure if it's true but it doesn't sound far off. There are large expanses of rural areas in the US that don't have the infrastructure for broadband in place).

 

sd

[+Menagerie]

As it turns out, I was looking at a number of caches that had large images when the horizontal scroll bar appeared. But, this was not an issue with the previous version. Not a big deal for me, I have a relatively high speed connection and access to new machines with large screens. It's just my suspicion that there are quite a few others who will be more significantly affected. Just my 0.02.

[+Ambrosia]

Why is it that I can't see the picture slideshow that everyone's talking about on the front page?

 

All I get is a dark gray spot.

 

Me wanna see pictures!

[+Anonymous']

Why is it that I can't see the picture slideshow that everyone's talking about on the front page?

 

All I get is a dark gray spot.

 

Me wanna see pictures!

Your computer doesn't like you.

[+Ambrosia]

Why is it that I can't see the picture slideshow that everyone's talking about on the front page?

 

All I get is a dark gray spot. 

 

Me wanna see pictures!

Your computer doesn't like you.

Yeah.

 

*sniff*

[EZ2GeoGranny]

I love it! Is it my imagination or has something changed with the way that the sites are hyperlinked to the cache search result page. Previously I was not able to pull one up on my Blackberry, the error said Java Script wasn't supported by this device (the Blackberry), so I suspect it was sending Java Script with a parameter to open the page, and the Blackbery only reads Java. I was out in the woods with a new member today and neither of us had printed the cache page (with the hints) so I thought I'd try it again, just in case the new change fixed that issue. AND IT WORKED! So if I forget to print it out in the future, I just need to make sure I take my Blackberry. THANKS!!! Edited February 20, 2005 by EZ2GeoGranny

[+SnoWake]

Hey, I like the new look. But is there any reason why every page on the new site has to have Javascript that removes any frames from around it?

 

It breaks some very legitmate uses of frames such as my Express Logging Tool .

 

Maybe there could be a parameter that could be passed that would turn this off?

I would like to second boulter's comments. I, too, am enjoying the new look and feel (apologies to those in the "creative and proud" camp - but I appreciate the optimized use of screen real estate. You STILL get a little bit of background - and can embed all the images you want WITHIN your page, so... isn't that already a compromise?)

 

But I digress - my point is about frames. I absolutely understand and appreciate the security concerns about content being 'framed', from cross-site scripting to phishing scams. However, I also have grown completely dependent on boulter's Express Logger. This tool completed the circle on my paperless eCaching, allowing me to take my field notes from CacheMate and quickly and easily log all my finds.

 

In addition to security concerns, I appreciate the Jeremy and company have significant performance concerns, and need to be wary of external entities developing automated interfaces to the geocaching.com platform. However, in the case of this particular tool, server load on gc.com is actually reduced significantly, as I am saved multiple "search->render results->select->render results->Log this find" transactions, instead just having quick access to a chronologically-sorted list of all the finds for the day (week/month), complete with my trade and TB notes, timestamp for the find - even the appropriate link to email the cache owner in the event its a virtual or ...

 

Okay, so enough cheerleading. I understand the justification for adding the "no-frame" javascript - but like the background camp, I plead for a compromise: Give some form of review, could "approved" sites pull page elements as frames?

 

I guess I should just shoot for the sky, and ask for a standards-compliant Web Services interface exposing a handful of key functions... but how do I motivate Jeremy into doing that??

 

Thanks again for the upgrade, and the new features. Looks great!!

 

Have a great weekend,

Billy

(aka SnoWake)

Edited February 20, 2005 by SnoWake

[+BalkanSabranje]

Just found the "TB reminder" on the "My Account" page. I like this idea.

 

BS/2

[+BalkanSabranje]

Two more glitches (haven't found them reported here before):

 

1. Being on one of the subpages of the "my" page, the link to "my account" in the left frame doesn't lead to the "my" page, but to the page where I already am.

 

2. What has to be the case that the following text could say:

You are 2 of 5 user(s) watching this cache.

or even worse:

You are 2 of 1 user(s) watching this cache.

Or is this impossible? If so, the first figure should't be bold IMO.

Edited February 27, 2005 by BalkanSabranje

[+IV_Warrior]

1. Being on one of the subpages of the "my" page, the link to "my account" in the left frame doesn't lead to the "my" page, but to the page where I already am.

I think that the "quick view" link will get you back to the page that you want.