Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 7
sbell111

Gc.com's New Look

Recommended Posts

I did a quick check of some of the profiles of members in this thread who say they like the new less background better. Many have few hides (less than 10 not counting event caches and travel bugs), and several had none. So, of course, it's of no importance to the people who never create cache pages.

Share this post


Link to post

I know of at least one puzzle cache where the clue is in the background. Anyway, the work we put into web design matters, just like the work we put into the physical containers. I've got a bunch of cache - and bug - pages that look pretty crappy at the moment. I could do a redesign, possibly using table cells, but I need to know the site is stable. I'd hate to redesign and then have the borders change again. So, whichever way it's going to be going forward, I'd just like to know, so I can work with it.

Share this post


Link to post
I did a quick check of some of the profiles of members in this thread who say they like the new less background better.  Many have few hides (less than 10 not counting event caches and travel bugs), and several had none.  So, of course, it's of no importance to the people who never create cache pages.

:rolleyes:

 

Interesting quickie poll, but 1) I doubt that its scalable, and 2) you kinda glossed over the fact that some of the people who posted that they like the new pages better have lots of finds and hides.

Edited by sbell111

Share this post


Link to post

Fine, if it's a poll, I am in favor of the new cleaner look. More info. on the same screen. Besides my 25 or so hides, I've found a few caches and the page reader's view is also relevant. I don't like cluttered cache pages with bells 'n whistles, sorry.

 

Backgrounds were never a supported feature, anyways.

Share this post


Link to post
I did a quick check of some of the profiles of members in this thread who say they like the new less background better. Many have few hides (less than 10 not counting event caches and travel bugs), and several had none. So, of course, it's of no importance to the people who never create cache pages.

I think we just found Michael Donnelly's fact checker :rolleyes:

Share this post


Link to post
I did a quick check of some of the profiles of members in this thread who say they like the new less background better.  Many have few hides (less than 10 not counting event caches and travel bugs), and several had none.  So, of course, it's of no importance to the people who never create cache pages.

:rolleyes:

 

Interesting quickie poll, but 1) I doubt that its scalable, and 2) you kinda glossed over the fact that some of the people who posted that they like the new pages better have lots of finds and hides.

Even so, Wild Cat Bud's point that those who don't create cache pages aren't impacted as much is still valid. Many owners will have to spend many hours (as noted by the Alethiometrists) revamping web pages to re-create the look/theme because of today's changes.

 

Most changes were great, but this one needed more flexibility as it seemed to come without warning. I have a feeling many will be heard from after the upcoming weekend of caching when they find their pages have changed, though they may not visit the forums.

Share this post


Link to post
I did a quick check of some of the profiles of members in this thread who say they like the new less background better.  Many have few hides (less than 10 not counting event caches and travel bugs), and several had none.  So, of course, it's of no importance to the people who never create cache pages.

:rolleyes:

 

Interesting quickie poll, but 1) I doubt that its scalable, and 2) you kinda glossed over the fact that some of the people who posted that they like the new pages better have lots of finds and hides.

Well, I could make a list of the names and the # of hides, for both those for and those against.....

Was not my intention to "gloss over" anything, but to merely indicate that most of the time, opinions are biased--mine certainly is. I want the old background width back because all my cache pages make use of it, a lot of time and effort was spent on making those pages and I hate to see it come to naught.

For those that have never made use of the feature, whether because they have no hides, or because they just don't like it, or don't want to use it, they have nothing to loose by saying they like the less background better. They don't see their hard work being "glossed over" with the bigger, wider table in the new format.

Share this post


Link to post
Fine, if it's a poll, I am in favor of the new cleaner look. More info. on the same screen. Besides my 25 or so hides, I've found a few caches and the page reader's view is also relevant. I don't like cluttered cache pages with bells 'n whistles, sorry.

 

Backgrounds were never a supported feature, anyways.

Well, you know how it is, the no censorship thing, "if you don't like it, don't have to look at it"--or listen to it.....

Share this post


Link to post
I did a quick check of some of the profiles of members in this thread who say they like the new less background better.  Many have few hides (less than 10 not counting event caches and travel bugs), and several had none.  So, of course, it's of no importance to the people who never create cache pages.

:rolleyes:

 

Interesting quickie poll, but 1) I doubt that its scalable, and 2) you kinda glossed over the fact that some of the people who posted that they like the new pages better have lots of finds and hides.

Even so, Wild Cat Bud's point that those who don't create cache pages aren't impacted as much is still valid. Many owners will have to spend many hours (as noted by the Alethiometrists) revamping web pages to re-create the look/theme because of today's changes.

 

Most changes were great, but this one needed more flexibility as it seemed to come without warning. I have a feeling many will be heard from after the upcoming weekend of caching when they find their pages have changed, though they may not visit the forums.

I've hidden a few and found a few. I agree with Lep 100% on this.

 

I personally think it's MORE important what the person that has to see the page thinks.

 

I wish there was a way for me, the cache hunter (viewer), to turn that it off so I NEVER had to see it.

 

It's not a supported feature, it's hacked in html, and J has warned people in the past that it might get "broken" by future website changes. (I wonder if this is the one he was talking about - I seem to think not since it seems to have been an oversight).

 

Keep it as it is NOW.

 

southdeltan

Share this post


Link to post
Fine, if it's a poll, I am in favor of the new cleaner look.  More info. on the same screen.  Besides my 25 or so hides, I've found a few caches and the page reader's view is also relevant.  I don't like cluttered cache pages with bells 'n whistles, sorry.

 

Backgrounds were never a supported feature, anyways.

Well, you know how it is, the no censorship thing, "if you don't like it, don't have to look at it"--or listen to it.....

I think I've found a subject for trying out that new "ignore" feature... :rolleyes:

Share this post


Link to post
I did a quick check of some of the profiles of members in this thread who say they like the new less background better. Many have few hides (less than 10 not counting event caches and travel bugs), and several had none. So, of course, it's of no importance to the people who never create cache pages.

Ok, so I have more than 20 hides. I like the new background. More info, less wasted space. Backgrounds shouldn't be used for important info for solving cache puzzes so they're nothing more than eye candy anyway.

 

If you want an "eye candy" site, go to Hooters.com or something :rolleyes:

Share this post


Link to post
or listen to it.....

Yes. I noticed most of your cache pages also contain background noise.

 

I happen to slightly prefer the smaller border, but I could go either way, really. I don't think the small border destroys anything. I even looked at your pages, and despite the annoying sound effects, I thought the pages looked fine--at least to a first time viewer.

 

I have to say that I really like the changes, which is an unusual thing for me to say. It all looks good.

 

Jamie

Share this post


Link to post
I know of at least one puzzle cache where the clue is in the background. Anyway, the work we put into web design matters, just like the work we put into the physical containers. I've got a bunch of cache - and bug - pages that look pretty crappy at the moment. I could do a redesign, possibly using table cells, but I need to know the site is stable. I'd hate to redesign and then have the borders change again. So, whichever way it's going to be going forward, I'd just like to know, so I can work with it.

This is why we don't need backgrounds:

 

WhyBackgroundsSuck.jpg

 

Can't even read what's at the bottom of the cache page!

Share this post


Link to post
I did a quick check of some of the profiles of members in this thread who say they like the new less background better.  Many have few hides (less than 10 not counting event caches and travel bugs), and several had none.  So, of course, it's of no importance to the people who never create cache pages.

:rolleyes:

 

Interesting quickie poll, but 1) I doubt that its scalable, and 2) you kinda glossed over the fact that some of the people who posted that they like the new pages better have lots of finds and hides.

Even so, Wild Cat Bud's point that those who don't create cache pages aren't impacted as much is still valid. Many owners will have to spend many hours (as noted by the Alethiometrists) revamping web pages to re-create the look/theme because of today's changes.

 

Most changes were great, but this one needed more flexibility as it seemed to come without warning. I have a feeling many will be heard from after the upcoming weekend of caching when they find their pages have changed, though they may not visit the forums.

I've hidden a few and found a few. I agree with Lep 100% on this.

 

I personally think it's MORE important what the person that has to see the page thinks.

 

I wish there was a way for me, the cache hunter (viewer), to turn that it off so I NEVER had to see it.

 

It's not a supported feature, it's hacked in html, and J has warned people in the past that it might get "broken" by future website changes. (I wonder if this is the one he was talking about - I seem to think not since it seems to have been an oversight).

 

Keep it as it is NOW.

 

southdeltan

Supported "feature" or not, hacked, or whacked or whatever. It WAS allowed, and it WAS NOT discouraged, and it happened to be something some of us enjoyed.

 

"I personally think it's MORE important what the person that has to see the page thinks."

Then you must also believe that the cache Seeker is more important than the cache Hider. Neither is true, the Hider (and how they create their cache page) is just as important as the Seeker and (what they have to look at), in geocaching, neither one works without the other.......

 

"I wish there was a way for me, the cache hunter (viewer), to turn that it off so I NEVER had to see it."

I do too, that would be a great option.

Edited by Wild Cat Bud

Share this post


Link to post
Ok, so I have more than 20 hides. I like the new background. More info, less wasted space. Backgrounds shouldn't be used for important info for solving cache puzzes so they're nothing more than eye candy anyway.

 

If you want an "eye candy" site, go to Hooters.com or something :rolleyes:

I understand that some, perhaps even a majority, will prefer more text, fewer images, and don't wish to argue. However, I do wish they could be more supportive of those who have worked so hard to create the type of cache pages they prefer and actually be the "global community" Jeremy now references on the home page.

 

Yes, I know the forums are for opinions, not compassion, but can't a more flexible option be found? Were that many people complaining about the margin widths before? I thought the "ignore" feature, "bookmark" feature, and cache attributes were the bigger issues (all much-discussed before the change and well done). I can deal with the background change either way and still enjoy caching. My pages aren't as drastically affected. However, I do often like the creativity of some of the themed backgrounds which will now be difficult for many to recreate on a cache page.

Edited by Teach2Learn

Share this post


Link to post

I live and cache in Houston, Texas. A big city, and very cache dense. There are many great and creative cachers here, both hiders and seekers. We're probably 'kings' of the puzzle caches. We enjoy participating in our brand of oneupmanship. We even enjoy taunting each other with our annoying songs, sound effects, and graphical displays. So I'm not just in mourning here for the loss of my own modest by-Houston-standards efforts, but for my friends and fellow cachers as well. This change affects MANY of us here in the Houston/Southeast Texas area. Not to mention the great cachers across the rest of state, in Austin, Dallas, San Antonio, Corpus, and just all over who are also affected.

Share this post


Link to post
Yes, I know the forums are for opinions, not compassion, but can't a more flexible option be found? Were that many people complaining about the margin widths before?

 

I liked shunra's idea:

 

Perhaps cache *owners* could control the width of the borders of their own pages only, with the default being minimal borders, as per the change you made?

 

I did work really hard resizing images to fit just so -- took me quite a while! Guess if I am defeated, however, I could also make really, really small pictures that you could see with a magnifying glass :rolleyes: I just am a nonconformist, I guess. Think I'll paint my doghouse white :) .

Share this post


Link to post

The State dropdown list on the "Seek a cache" page lost some height. The others are a bit bigger than their adjacent button; State is a bit smaller, and the bottom of the state name is cut off. (Nitpicking!) :)

 

seek_a_cache.jpg

 

Re: backgrounds -- personally, I'm interested in the cache information, not the web design skills of the cache owner. Also, with virtually any software or service provider in the world, if you took advantage of an officially unsupported feature and then complained when it broke or didn't work the same way, the answer you'd get would be universal: "too bad, so sad". Get over it. :rolleyes:

 

Shared bookmark lists: are these supposed to show up when I look at someone's profile page, or what? How do I see shared lists that other people have created? Is there a global "list of lists" somewhere that I can browse to see what other people have found worth bookmarking? :)

Share this post


Link to post
Did the font just get smaller on the cache pages? :rolleyes:

 

I must need new glasses. :) It seems awfully small. :)

Hear Hear! Font size needs to be increased. Other than that so far so good! :)

Share this post


Link to post

Couldn't we keep the small border on all the pages except the individual cache viewing page? (I dont' care for borders at all, however) At least then people could have their borders just on the individual cache pages. If that's too much work, let's just leave it how it is. I also like the idea of the wide border at the bottom for those who want to customize.

 

One question, why are the buttons at the upper right on a cache page of different textures?

Share this post


Link to post
Did the font just get smaller on the cache pages? :rolleyes:

 

I must need new glasses.  :)  It seems awfully small.  :)

Hear Hear! Font size needs to be increased. Other than that so far so good! :)

Go to view in your browser, and increase the font size.

 

As far as the new look goes, I don't like loss of so much of the background images to the ad space, for lack of a better term.

 

I have backgrounds on some of my hides, and I would like people to see them. B)

 

Other than that, from what I've seen, it's great.

Share this post


Link to post
Also, with virtually any software or service provider in the world, if you took advantage of an officially unsupported feature and then complained when it broke or didn't work the same way, the answer you'd get would be universal: "too bad, so sad". Get over it. :rolleyes:

 

Of course this is true, that is a provider's prerogative, but the complainer also has options and choices........

Share this post


Link to post
Did the font just get smaller on the cache pages? :rolleyes:

Did you just hold down the ctrl key while rotating the middle wheel thingy on your mouse?

 

Menubar --> View --> Text Size --> ?

DUH :)

Thanks Hemlock :)

Double DUH! I never new you could do that! Thanks! B)

 

MUST...LEARN...TO...READ...ENTIRE...THREAD!! :)

Edited by Spzzmoose

Share this post


Link to post
Re: backgrounds -- personally, I'm interested in the cache information, not the web design skills of the cache owner. Also, with virtually any software or service provider in the world, if you took advantage of an officially unsupported feature and then complained when it broke or didn't work the same way, the answer you'd get would be universal: "too bad, so sad". Get over it.  :rolleyes:

I agree WZK, I don't care for the backgrounds on cache pages. I'm interested in what the page says, not for the 'decoration'.

Share this post


Link to post
Also, with virtually any software or service provider in the world, if you took advantage of an officially unsupported feature and then complained when it broke or didn't work the same way, the answer you'd get would be universal: "too bad, so sad". Get over it.  :rolleyes:

 

Of course this is true, that is a provider's prerogative, but the complainer also has options and choices........

Well, you could always choose to customize your cache page backgrounds on TC.com or NC.com. Let us know how it works over there.

Share this post


Link to post
I did a quick check of some of the profiles of members in this thread who say they like the new less background better.  Many have few hides (less than 10 not counting event caches and travel bugs), and several had none.  So, of course, it's of no importance to the people who never create cache pages.

Well, between his, hers, and ours we have 40 hides, and quite a few of them have fancy backgrounds. Given a choice, I will take useful content over fluff any day. So even though our backgrounds dont work either, I still vote yeah for the new cache pages.

Share this post


Link to post
Ok, so I have more than 20 hides. I like the new background. More info, less wasted space. Backgrounds shouldn't be used for important info for solving cache puzzes so they're nothing more than eye candy anyway.

 

If you want an "eye candy" site, go to Hooters.com or something :)

I understand that some, perhaps even a majority, will prefer more text, fewer images, and don't wish to argue. However, I do wish they could be more supportive of those who have worked so hard to create the type of cache pages they prefer and actually be the "global community" Jeremy now references on the home page.

 

Yes, I know the forums are for opinions, not compassion, but can't a more flexible option be found? Were that many people complaining about the margin widths before? I thought the "ignore" feature, "bookmark" feature, and cache attributes were the bigger issues (all much-discussed before the change and well done). I can deal with the background change either way and still enjoy caching. My pages aren't as drastically affected. However, I do often like the creativity of some of the themed backgrounds which will now be difficult for many to recreate on a cache page.

compassion is a sign of weakness :rolleyes:

Share this post


Link to post
Re: backgrounds -- personally, I'm interested in the cache information, not the web design skills of the cache owner. Also, with virtually any software or service provider in the world, if you took advantage of an officially unsupported feature and then complained when it broke or didn't work the same way, the answer you'd get would be universal: "too bad, so sad". Get over it.  :rolleyes:

I agree WZK, I don't care for the backgrounds on cache pages. I'm interested in what the page says, not for the 'decoration'.

Well, then I can only guess that those who do not like the "decorations", the "eye candy", the "bells and whistles", are also not too interested in how creative the physical cache itself is. IMO creativity spills over, by far NOT ALL great caches have a "fancy" page, but many do, and not all "fancy" page caches are great, but many are. I enjoy both the creative page and the creative cache. However, I will admit many also enjoy the micro-on-the-light-pole-in-the-WalMart-parking-lot type caches, on the plain cache page, when often the only description is: "Bring your own pen."

All I'm asking is, can't there be a choice......

Edited by Wild Cat Bud

Share this post


Link to post
Re: backgrounds -- personally, I'm interested in the cache information, not the web design skills of the cache owner. Also, with virtually any software or service provider in the world, if you took advantage of an officially unsupported feature and then complained when it broke or didn't work the same way, the answer you'd get would be universal: "too bad, so sad". Get over it.  :rolleyes:

I agree WZK, I don't care for the backgrounds on cache pages. I'm interested in what the page says, not for the 'decoration'.

Well, then I can only guess that those who do not like the "decorations", the "eye candy", the "bells and whistles", are also not too interested in how creative the physical cache itself is. IMO creativity spills over, by far NOT ALL great caches have a "fancy" page, but many do, and not all "fancy" page caches are great, but many are. I enjoy both the creative page and the creative cache. However, I will admit many also enjoy the micro-on-the-light-pole-in-the-WalMart-parking-lot type caches, on the plain cache page, when often the only description is: "Bring your own pen."

All I'm asking is, can't there be a choice......

So, let me make sure I understand this.

 

The only way a cache can be creative if the cache page is creative. And the only way a cache page can be creative is if you can use fancy backgrounds.

 

Gotcha. Thanks for clearing that up for me. :)

Share this post


Link to post

I like it. Even though I've got a lot of cutom backgrounds I think it still looks good. It's a sleeker looking site now. If you make the image for the BG really, really small you can still see it. :rolleyes:

Share this post


Link to post

Am I the only one who noticed the width didn't really change? From 590 to 605 is only a 15 pixel difference...

 

The loss of background image is mostly because of the dk. grey empty rectangle below the advertising... If that grey background is reverted back to none, I think it would be a win-win.

 

Ironically, the links at the bottom are still "backgroundless" so white/light backgrounds make them invisible (one of my pages).

 

I think you can keep the current sizing, but simply remove that useless grey panel (wasted real estate anyway) and everyone will be happy. (After all, the button are graphics that don't need any background...)

 

If the grey copyright bar at the bottom is then centered under the white log table, it'll look better than now too.

 

hth,

 

Randy

 

(Another vote for 'more background' despite browsing w/images off--they add a sense of community and creativity. Sure every house could be required to be a certain color with street number emblazoned in a specific fashion, but I much prefer variety and creativity and appreciate environments that foster it. Thanks!)

Share this post


Link to post
Re: backgrounds -- personally, I'm interested in the cache information, not the web design skills of the cache owner. Also, with virtually any software or service provider in the world, if you took advantage of an officially unsupported feature and then complained when it broke or didn't work the same way, the answer you'd get would be universal: "too bad, so sad". Get over it.  :rolleyes:

I agree WZK, I don't care for the backgrounds on cache pages. I'm interested in what the page says, not for the 'decoration'.

Well, then I can only guess that those who do not like the "decorations", the "eye candy", the "bells and whistles", are also not too interested in how creative the physical cache itself is. IMO creativity spills over, by far NOT ALL great caches have a "fancy" page, but many do, and not all "fancy" page caches are great, but many are. I enjoy both the creative page and the creative cache. However, I will admit many also enjoy the micro-on-the-light-pole-in-the-WalMart-parking-lot type caches, on the plain cache page, when often the only description is: "Bring your own pen."

All I'm asking is, can't there be a choice......

So, let me make sure I understand this.

 

The only way a cache can be creative if the cache page is creative. And the only way a cache page can be creative is if you can use fancy backgrounds.

 

Gotcha. Thanks for clearing that up for me. :)

Can't read, or can't comprehend?

 

NOT ALL great caches have a "fancy" page, but many do, and not all "fancy" page caches are great, but many are.

Share this post


Link to post

To give equal time from the Browser Ed Department to the Mozilla/Phoenix/Firefox users, either the control mousewheel trick above or alt + and alt - will increase or reduce font size on a page-by-page basis.

 

If you really don't ever want to see anything below size X, bring up Edit->Preferences->Font and set minimum font size to X. Once you've done this, the browser simply refuses attempts to set font sizes smaller than X. It's quite handy for reading pages written by folks that haven't realized that not everybody is still running a browser in an 800x600 mode and 4 point fonts really aren't that readable.

 

And if you're wondering what all this fuss about backgrounds (you know, the ones that didn't render well on things like your cell fone, your PDA, or GSAK) is about, you've probably forgotten that years ago, you did an edit->preferences->appearance->colors and in the options for "When a web page provides its own colors and background" you must have selected "Use my chosen colors, ignoring the colors and background image specified".

Share this post


Link to post
Re: backgrounds -- personally, I'm interested in the cache information, not the web design skills of the cache owner. Also, with virtually any software or service provider in the world, if you took advantage of an officially unsupported feature and then complained when it broke or didn't work the same way, the answer you'd get would be universal: "too bad, so sad". Get over it.  :rolleyes:

I agree WZK, I don't care for the backgrounds on cache pages. I'm interested in what the page says, not for the 'decoration'.

Well, then I can only guess that those who do not like the "decorations", the "eye candy", the "bells and whistles", are also not too interested in how creative the physical cache itself is. IMO creativity spills over, by far NOT ALL great caches have a "fancy" page, but many do, and not all "fancy" page caches are great, but many are. I enjoy both the creative page and the creative cache. However, I will admit many also enjoy the micro-on-the-light-pole-in-the-WalMart-parking-lot type caches, on the plain cache page, when often the only description is: "Bring your own pen."

All I'm asking is, can't there be a choice......

Yes, you'd only be guessing. :)

 

In my experience, a flashy cache page sometimes translates to a poorly planned hide. Some folks show their best talents at the keyboard, not in the woods.

 

In my experience, a short cache description full of typos sometimes translates into a spectacular cache. ("In the state forest. tuff hike, take lots of water and watch the skeeters, their bad. good luck.") Some folks show their best talents out in the woods, not at the keyboard.

 

There's also a group in the middle, that have nice cache pages AND a nice container. That's great, but I regard the fancy cache page as wholly unnecessary.

 

Fundamentally, this is a game that gets me *away* from the computer and out into the world. I care much more about what I find out there. In fact, because of pocket queries, the only time I'm likely to see the cache page is when I log my find. At that point, having already found the soggy log, the music and animated gif's on the cache page are just an annoyance.

 

I'll thank folks kindly not to generalize about what I care about.

Share this post


Link to post
Am I the only one who noticed the width didn't really change?  From 590 to 605 is only a 15 pixel difference...

 

The loss of background image is mostly because of the dk. grey empty rectangle below the advertising...  If that grey background is reverted back to none, I think it would be a win-win.

 

Ironically, the links at the bottom are still "backgroundless" so white/light backgrounds make them invisible (one of my pages).

 

I think you can keep the current sizing, but simply remove that useless grey panel (wasted real estate anyway) and everyone will be happy.  (After all, the button are graphics that don't need any background...)

 

If the grey copyright bar at the bottom is then centered under the white log table, it'll look better than now too.

 

hth,

 

Randy

 

(Another vote for 'more background' despite browsing w/images off--they add a sense of community and creativity.  Sure every house could be required to be a certain color with street number emblazoned in a specific fashion, but I much prefer variety and creativity and appreciate environments that foster it.  Thanks!)

This sounds like a real possibility if it would allow for choice while still maintaining the "sleek/clean" look (aka "plain/boring" for others).

 

Maybe Jeremy will view it as a good option.

Edited by Teach2Learn

Share this post


Link to post
NOT ALL great caches have a "fancy" page, but many do, and not all "fancy" page caches are great, but many are.

Ah, shouting.

 

That always makes for a compelling argument.

Share this post


Link to post
The background is at most relevant to the cache pages themselves, not to any of the other pages. Perhaps cache *owners* could control the width of the borders of their own pages only, with the default being minimal borders, as per the change you made?

I don't see why graphical information should be outside of the page, rather than on the page. Pages should be as big as possible. This would ALSO provide more space for those of us who want to add themed graphics. In other words: the new design is better for everone.

 

The only argument for wide margins would be the preservation of themed art in existing caches. I suggest to solve that problem by having a wide lower margin. The theme elements could still be viewed by scrolling down.

Actually, when you scroll down to the bottom, you can see a lot of the background at the moment.

 

The problem is that a lot of times, the background is a pic of the cache site, or some other theme that sould show best on the left side, and not at the bottom. The majority of my cache pages show best or almost totally on the sides, not the bottom.

Share this post


Link to post
Am I the only one who noticed the width didn't really change? From 590 to 605 is only a 15 pixel difference...

 

The loss of background image is mostly because of the dk. grey empty rectangle below the advertising... If that grey background is reverted back to none, I think it would be a win-win.

 

Ironically, the links at the bottom are still "backgroundless" so white/light backgrounds make them invisible (one of my pages).

 

I think you can keep the current sizing, but simply remove that useless grey panel (wasted real estate anyway) and everyone will be happy. (After all, the button are graphics that don't need any background...)

 

If the grey copyright bar at the bottom is then centered under the white log table, it'll look better than now too.

 

hth,

 

Randy

 

(Another vote for 'more background' despite browsing w/images off--they add a sense of community and creativity. Sure every house could be required to be a certain color with street number emblazoned in a specific fashion, but I much prefer variety and creativity and appreciate environments that foster it. Thanks!)

That's true, the area isn't that much wider, it is that gray bar down the side covering up the background graphic. It does make the logs area look centered up now is all the difference I can see.

Never did understand either why those "backgroundless" links weren't up in the white table under or adjacent to the current time and other info, where they could always be read.

Share this post


Link to post
NOT ALL great caches have a "fancy" page, but many do, and not all "fancy" page caches are great, but many are. 

Ah, shouting.

 

That always makes for a compelling argument.

I was not shouting, just enlarging the text so it could be more easy for some to read. You clipped the quote, it also contained the question: "Can't read, or can't comprehend?"

Share this post


Link to post
Re: backgrounds -- personally, I'm interested in the cache information, not the web design skills of the cache owner. Also, with virtually any software or service provider in the world, if you took advantage of an officially unsupported feature and then complained when it broke or didn't work the same way, the answer you'd get would be universal: "too bad, so sad". Get over it.  ;)

I agree WZK, I don't care for the backgrounds on cache pages. I'm interested in what the page says, not for the 'decoration'.

Well, then I can only guess that those who do not like the "decorations", the "eye candy", the "bells and whistles", are also not too interested in how creative the physical cache itself is. IMO creativity spills over, by far NOT ALL great caches have a "fancy" page, but many do, and not all "fancy" page caches are great, but many are. I enjoy both the creative page and the creative cache. However, I will admit many also enjoy the micro-on-the-light-pole-in-the-WalMart-parking-lot type caches, on the plain cache page, when often the only description is: "Bring your own pen."

All I'm asking is, can't there be a choice......

Yes, you'd only be guessing. ;)

 

In my experience, a flashy cache page sometimes translates to a poorly planned hide. Some folks show their best talents at the keyboard, not in the woods.

 

In my experience, a short cache description full of typos sometimes translates into a spectacular cache. ("In the state forest. tuff hike, take lots of water and watch the skeeters, their bad. good luck.") Some folks show their best talents out in the woods, not at the keyboard.

 

There's also a group in the middle, that have nice cache pages AND a nice container. That's great, but I regard the fancy cache page as wholly unnecessary.

 

Fundamentally, this is a game that gets me *away* from the computer and out into the world. I care much more about what I find out there. In fact, because of pocket queries, the only time I'm likely to see the cache page is when I log my find. At that point, having already found the soggy log, the music and animated gif's on the cache page are just an annoyance.

 

I'll thank folks kindly not to generalize about what I care about.

Again, I ask, can't read, or can't comprehend?

Of course there are always exceptions.

Greatest most creative cache page ever, and the cache reeks.

or the stupidest cache description you've ever read, turns out to be the cache finding experience never to be forgotton.

But, generally, those are exceptions.

 

Okay, so you're saying what YOU care about is the most important thing here. Having choices doesn't matter as long as YOU are happy.

All I'm asking, is can't there be a choice........

Share this post


Link to post

I read your posts, and almost wish for the cheesy midi music from your cache pages to be playing in the background. That way, I'd close the forum thread as fast as I closed your cache page.

 

Jeremy, I want forum post sounds! And I want them NOW! I am DISTRAUGHT!

Edited by The Leprechauns

Share this post


Link to post

I have over 750 finds and almost 40 hides and I vote for a COMPROMISE on the page border. Sure , there always going to be some people who put up backgrounds that are annoying and there's always going to be someone who doesn't like your background no matter how "neutral" or creative it is. But there is no denying that part of the "feel" and individuality for a cache is the carefully chosen background image.

 

What the site has now is more "border" and less background. We've actually been dealt a double whammy on losing background image space because the table takes up more space AND there is now a gray border on the left side that was not there before. A COMPROMISE might be to either remove the gray border or reduce the table percentage.

 

I understand the want for more info and less clutter but in my experienced cacher and "charter member" opinion, I would like there to be more compromise on showing more background image.

 

Otherwise, I like the work you (Jeremy) and the other frogs have done.

Share this post


Link to post
I read your posts, and almost wish for the cheesy midi music from your cache pages to be playing in the background.  That way, I'd close the forum thread as fast as I closed your cache page.

 

Jeremy, I want forum post sounds! And I want them NOW!  I am DISTRAUGHT!

Cheesy midi music, aye? I'm not going to argue or insult you back. I've seen those Leprechauns movies. ;)

Edited by Wild Cat Bud

Share this post


Link to post

The more I use the web page, the more I like the new color choices. The contrast is excellent.

 

I keep wondering what the empty space about the cache title is about.

Share this post


Link to post

People, people, people. ;) The answer to the backgrounds is staring you in the face! This one popped up in our local forums and seems an excellent solution: all done with SPAN, DIV and CSS elements. Really just as simple as the old body background trick.

 

Take a bow, rediguana :P

 

Oh, and great re-design Jeremy!! ;)

Edited by GSVNoFixedAbode

Share this post


Link to post

I really love the new look. Great job, Jeremy!

 

I don't get the whole thing about people who are complaining about not being able to mess with the background, etc. for their puzzle caches. In my opinion, puzzles that rely on that kind of thing tend not to be very good puzzles.

 

The cache pages that people labor for hours over tend to be very poorly designed and, quite frankly, ugly. But if the hider really wants the cache page to look (and sound) a particular way, there is a very easy solution:

 

Host your own darn page!

 

Hosted Web space is now available for about $5 a month. If your background-image puzzle cache is really that important to you, then host the page yourself.

 

Once again, the new design looks great.

Share this post


Link to post

I frequently have the need to print cache pages. Yes, real paper being used and everything. Under the old site, I was scaling down the print job using Safari's page setup in order to fit the vertical size of the cache page to as few pieces of paper as I could stand, which produced a lot of wasted space on the sides and made the font in the middle strip annoyingly small. This version prints more cleanly with less scaling.

 

FWIW, I appreciate the more-text version of the site over the more-background version. its a practical thing with me, not an argument over cache page creativity or how many hides one has. There are other ways to associate images with a cache. Perhaps if the image is crucial to the cache experience, it should be included inline in the description?

Share this post


Link to post

I wish everybody would be just a little nicer about this background thing. It's fine to have different opinions, but they are just that - opinions. Let's all back off and be nice to each other. ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 7

×
×
  • Create New...