| 1:59 pm on Jan 1, 2011 (gmt 0)|
Those two should be spliced Same topic [webmasterworld.com]
IMHO I would like the pic using CSS float left or right within the intro/presentation txt, (I understand that the intro got to be long enough for it and maybe the img could be slightly smaller)
It will take less real estate and it could look more appealing, as is I see too much white space.
nevertheless I do like the concept.
Happy New Year!
| 1:40 pm on Jan 1, 2011 (gmt 0)|
System: The following message was spliced on to this thread from: http://www.webmasterworld.com/webmasterworld/4248060.htm [webmasterworld.com] by brett_tabke - 8:44 am on Jan 1, 2011 (cst -6)
I had to look twice to make sure I was on the right site. WOW I was not expecting pictures.
IMHO they use up too much real estate.
| 2:45 pm on Jan 1, 2011 (gmt 0)|
Just trying out some stuff. Dunno if spaghetti is going to stick unless you throw it.
| 6:46 pm on Jan 1, 2011 (gmt 0)|
I dont have an issue with images - but the quality of the ones on the home page at present are pretty poor in my opinion.
| 7:51 pm on Jan 2, 2011 (gmt 0)|
Just four words - awful, really really awful.
Long version: Where in the past I could just open the homepage to get the most important headlines from the web world (albeit sometimes a bit late compared to other sites), or find a relevant thread covering recent developments, I now have to wade through useless images and waay too much copy.
Unfortunately, this does not even LOOK good to me - the design looks very amateurish (like from 1998 or so) and it is a SHAME for Webmasterworld, even more so if you consider the extensive "feedback days" a while ago where plenty of feedback was given and help offered.
In fact, this design is one more reason to NOT visit this site, despite its valuable content. Also, when recommending it to others one now has to add "just ignore the ugly homepage" which is not good.
Sorry for the harsh feedback, but I was really shocked to see this today, and I would like to see this reverted a.s.a.p.
| 9:26 pm on Jan 2, 2011 (gmt 0)|
I am much happier with the images floated to the right and sized the way they are. It still takes away from the real estate but works.
| 9:41 pm on Jan 2, 2011 (gmt 0)|
As I suggested, floating img is fine and we need to keep in mind that at this point it's all about testing, so hold your horses :)
my other suggestion will be to have a continuity in img look/style, which probably will come next.
| 11:14 pm on Jan 2, 2011 (gmt 0)|
I would never have noticed without this thread, rarely visit the homepage
@zett, surely an RSS reader would just give the plain old headlines if that's what you want to scan (or are the images in the RSS too?)
it's a hard job sometimes trying to do some interior decorating, people just don't like change sometimes - good thing about web pages is that you can paint over really quickly :)
anyway I like it although agree with henry0 that they need some sort of uniformity in size and presentation, I like the whitespace that they've introduced
| 3:40 am on Jan 3, 2011 (gmt 0)|
in all the thousands of suggestions that came out of the feedback a few months ago, I don't remember one single person suggesting throwing a collection of poor quality images onto the front page. Maybe I missed it. There were plenty of good tips, tips that added to the site and I've only seen one or two implemented so far.
| 8:08 am on Jan 3, 2011 (gmt 0)|
|Just four words - awful, really really awful. |
about sums up my view as well - why not throw some animated gifs as well as the kitchen sink
| 8:20 am on Jan 3, 2011 (gmt 0)|
|we need to keep in mind that at this point it's all about testing, so hold your horses :) |
So, the installed user base (of professional Webmasters) is being used as guinea pigs? May I suggest to do a proper (closed) beta test, collect the feedback and then go into a formal deployment of the changes?
You see, this is not Google where a test (possibly) thrills thousands of users who excitedly blog or tweet about this. This is webmasterworld, a community site that competes with several other sites in the same niche. Only very few people will blog: "Wow. I've seen WebmasterWorld experimenting with stuff. They now use PICTURES next to the headlines. Wow." Not many will write this.
I would expect webmasterworld to use state-of-the-art site design that is properly usability tested before implementation. IMO, the way the changes are being done here is a good lesson on how NOT to do it.
Then again, maybe I'm just old-fashioned.
|brotherhood of LAN|
| 8:24 am on Jan 3, 2011 (gmt 0)|
|get the most important headlines |
The WebmasterWorld RSS feed [webmasterworld.com] doesn't have the new images zett, if you find that easier to use. Much the same content as the home page.
| 11:14 am on Jan 3, 2011 (gmt 0)|
Then again, maybe I'm just old-fashioned.
Nope - I think your method is the new way of doing things.
| 6:08 pm on Jan 3, 2011 (gmt 0)|
How about them Bears? ;-)
| 10:10 pm on Jan 4, 2011 (gmt 0)|
Can't be image search bait with no titles, no alt, and file names like "homepage-149_4248526.jpg"....
The weird thing is Google's image cache has a different image for:
Than what is online now at that URL... but maybe that's what you're testing, huh? Did I guess right? What do I win?
| 12:10 am on Jan 5, 2011 (gmt 0)|
Brett: Congrats on the bold move to add images to the forum index. I think it really spices up the place and adds value to forum for new users.
We have 5 senses and males being a visually stimulated sex; like visual cues. So I view this as a plus. :)
| 6:41 am on Jan 5, 2011 (gmt 0)|
|We have 5 senses and males being a visually stimulated sex; like visual cues. |
Well, well. Personally, I think the images do not stimulate me. Right now I am seeing (from top to bottom):
- Firefox logo
- Some weird circle (apparently a distorted clock)
- facebook logo with money
- blekko logo
- 32 GB hard drive
- 2010/2011 logo
- Girl in money rain
- Girl with glass ball
- (no image for "Internet TV")
- facebook vs. Google logo
- iPhone photo
- blekko logo (again!)
- facebook vs. Google logo (again!)
- Google Adwords logo with question mark
- FIRED logo
- (no image for "What shall I do...")
- (no image for "Google Adsense testing...")
- A group of business guys (hard to make out)
- A guy in casual clothes holding a speech (Matt Cutts?)
- (no image for "What is the smallest thing...")
- ebay logo with brands4friends logo
- (no image for "Google adds...")
- del.icio.us logo
- facebook logo with money (again!)
Visually stimulating? You must be kidding!
And so I stick with my previous comments: looks 1998-ish and does not add ANY value to the site (on the contrary: all the copy makes the page longer, thus making it HARDER to spot valuable information. The images are boring and un-inspiried (at best) and again add almost NO value to the reader. One could put them away as "eye candy", but they are not candy.
Since there is very little debate over this, I assume that WebmasterWorld regulars just do not care enough. Or maybe they simply stay off the site, thinking - "so what?" and move to other community sites.
| 7:24 am on Jan 5, 2011 (gmt 0)|
Most SERIOUS users of this forum go directly to RECENT POSTS instead of the homepage... after all, that's the most recent traffic and in need of our commentary (should we be so inclined).
I'm not a fan of the pics, but I don't "hate" them. I'd be more inclined to being receptive it each forum had it's own "mini-logo" specific to WW that visually augments the already text based "from this forum" links. Reduces the number of images, standardizes them, and for some might make it easier to quick scan/scroll the homepage to find content appealing to their interests.
I would be intrigued in test results if pic were inserted in the Subscription Portion of Webmasterworld (I am not a subscribed member, despite my years on the forum) and how that works out.
| 11:27 am on Jan 5, 2011 (gmt 0)|
tangor mentioned something quite interesting:
|Most SERIOUS users of this forum go directly to RECENT POSTS instead of the homepage... after all, that's the most recent traffic and in need of our commentary (should we be so inclined). |
This brings the following: If you don't know about that link you won't find it, needs to be more obvious!
Something like top of left col categories summary?
| 1:21 am on Jan 6, 2011 (gmt 0)|
Ya, is for regulars. We all find it.
The recent posts, is not necc intended for new users.
Most new users come through the homepage before becoming members.
Most members do not come through the homepage.
Most members come in through the forums index, the active list, or and RSS feed.
The performance of the homepage is clearly declining. Traffic conversions off the homepage have steadily fallen over the years since we switched to the blog style homepage in 03.
> Can't be image search bait
lol. Image search is viable traffic for p*rn! sites.
| 7:08 am on Jan 6, 2011 (gmt 0)|
I don't like the pics and the expended blog-like posts, but I understand exactly what Brett is trying to do here and why he needs to experiment. I don't mind that he releases all of this to the wider community. There's a possibility that that the user base here is changing and instead of just testing with no saying regulars, he's trying to reach out to all.
Sometimes I fear for WebmasterWorld because I know they are going up against strong upstarts that have more puzzazz and audiences with shorter attention spans. What's happening here is what is happening all over the Web right now with a serious short in how people consume Web media. WebmasterWorld, even with its entrenched user base and deep niche with valuable offering still has to compete for eyeballs.
Instead of criticizing Brett and his team for trying to stay relevant (although I criticized the Techcrunch-like posts a few weeks ago), I benefit from this case study and see what can be learned from an old webmaster who's trying to adapt the language of his site for a new generation of webmasters and a changing web place. There is much to learn here, instead of criticizing Brett, if one knows what to look for.
| 8:40 am on Jan 6, 2011 (gmt 0)|
Wow - I should bookmark this thread in case I ever have delusions of wanting to start a forum :)
I noticed it, felt slightly amused (a "was that there before?" feeling), and clicked on recent posts. Besides craigslist - there aren't many quality sites with significantly less graphical clutter than WebmasterWorld. You can't blame a webmaster for tinkering, but then again I guess you can't expect that the however many tons of other webmasters that visit will think it is a good idea.
I think for April fools day Brett should use a facebook like skin with pure Ajax & Flash combo.
| 10:40 am on Jan 6, 2011 (gmt 0)|
| 11:18 am on Jan 6, 2011 (gmt 0)|
As an "Seasoned member" I know what I want and don't care if it was blue or green, Italic or Cap.
content matters, however to reach a new audience a new "new look" could be paramount.
Do we know anything about the audience to reach?
what are they looking for?
where do they usually hang out
| 11:47 am on Jan 6, 2011 (gmt 0)|
I get the impression that these new templates are being developed in a huge browser window. On the homepage I see one news item without scrolling, and when navigating through threads I see only the pink first post. I'm running a browser window about 1000px wide and maybe 700px high.
The irritation is I was able to use this site in my normal browser view prior to these improvements. Is it worth adding a note saying "this site best viewed in 1920px*1080px browser window"?
| 1:31 pm on Jan 6, 2011 (gmt 0)|
> I think for April fools day Brett should use a facebook like skin with pure Ajax & Flash combo.
I was thinking a "click-a-thon" for lonely ads. Our goal would be to issue $1 billion dollars worth of ad clicks. We'd advertise it in the advertising forums like AdSense. I think the AdSense nuts would just love it ;-)
| 2:08 pm on Jan 8, 2011 (gmt 0)|
Change is good, change is evolution. That's the way we got here in the first place! Keep trying things out, Brett and just watch the logs, not the feedback of a few single people who will ALWAYS complain!
| 9:50 pm on Jan 8, 2011 (gmt 0)|
One word: lynx
| 7:36 am on Jan 10, 2011 (gmt 0)|
Brett and CO.
Images addition is (as stated above) okay but not particularly desired. What I'm NOT enamored with is the editorializing (need better editors or NO editors...and coders/forum mods are NOT editors in the true sense). THAT pretty much guarantees I'll stick to RECENT POSTS as my landing page, even though, all these years, I've always hit HOME first THEN clicked on RECENT. Whether you, the crew, or the editors of the front page know it, the TONE (politics) of the home page has changed.
I'd rather "get my motor runnin'" reading "on the byway" (forum pages) instead of HOME. (sic, added in edit... some will trounce me in that the word is "highway"... I played guitar with Steppenwolf years back and know the difference... as a sub for three venues)
I realize that experiments between rez 800 to 1939 (okay, 1920, but there is a "war" on in resolutions) requires experiments on what can be viewed on any and all res mentioned... but not on same res ZOOMED by "old eyes" ( [webmasterworld.com...] ) which makes it a LENGTHY SCROLL even at 1690 full screen with a min font of 20.
YET... WW has got to make a change. I know this, I think all of us know this. This clean, uncluttered interface is so... (to the idjuts o' duh web) so... boring. And YET, AGAIN, those idiots are not the audience intended.
Might I suggest a look at other eye candy yet relevant sites, a right float random Top Ten/Twenty in ACTIVITY sidebar, some RED TITLES (bearing in mind that some 10% are colorblind), 160/220 images of SIGNIFICANT IMPORTANCE (else NONE), and a weather bar. But don't forget the lobby bar as well (I'll have a brewski, thanks!) The last two are tongue in cheek.
Experiment we must, but don't experiment the heart out of Webmasterworld. This is one of the few places where REAL info can be found regarding web (space) mastering... and even that cheeky (and equally relevant) site The Register thinks we're hot stuff, too. Don't want to lose that in all the experiments.
| This 51 message thread spans 2 pages: 51 (  2 ) > > |