SOTW's down. Are we currently Number 1?
- Thread starter Groovekiller
- Start date
Ya, I'm not a fan of the new look either... Too much like Windows 7. Big blocky and annoying. Too much white though. gah.
Cue death of WooF posts in 3... 2.. 1.
Gah that new style is weird.
Ed and Pete, my vote goes to leave this thing like it is.
Gah that new style is weird.
Ed and Pete, my vote goes to leave this thing like it is.
Nothing more boring than completely agreeing but in this instance I will settle for complete boredom. I 100% agree...ugh, that hurt.
I don't terribly mind the new layout, but Harri should set up the redirect to the Forum, not the CMS.
First, other themes are available for vBulletin 4.0.x. I plan on looking at a few. (If y'all wanna take a look, too, please do and post back which theme(s) you like. Note that only people with vBulletin licenses can see some things, so you might have to skip some posts there.)
Second, and most importantly, the folks at vBulletin don't actively support their old versions. In other words, if something breaks in 3.8.4pl2, we can post and hope someone answers. For 4.0.x, they're required to fix it: we've got a contract.
Third, vBulletin may not put out updates for old versions. It's kinda like saying that there's this new virus that totally trashes Windows 98 machines. Microsoft's not really going to care much about that, but if YOU run Windows 98, you'll care.
First, other themes are available for vBulletin 4.0.x. I plan on looking at a few. (If y'all wanna take a look, too, please do and post back which theme(s) you like. Note that only people with vBulletin licenses can see some things, so you might have to skip some posts there.)
Second, and most importantly, the folks at vBulletin don't actively support their old versions. In other words, if something breaks in 3.8.4pl2, we can post and hope someone answers. For 4.0.x, they're required to fix it: we've got a contract.
Third, vBulletin may not put out updates for old versions. It's kinda like saying that there's this new virus that totally trashes Windows 98 machines. Microsoft's not really going to care much about that, but if YOU run Windows 98, you'll care.
I'll chime in if you're still interested in people who joined because SOTW was down (though now back). I wanted to send a PM and had noticed that I could reach the person here too.
I'm hoping to continue to learn from both, and I'm going to point a flute player friend of my wife's in this direction.
I'm hoping to continue to learn from both, and I'm going to point a flute player friend of my wife's in this direction.
I hear you Pete, but you can keep the engine beneath the bonnet updated without breaking the user interface people got accustomed to. New users might not care (because they don't know anything else) but many if not most existing users will be p* off by more than just subtle changes. See what MS did with their "intuitive" Office 7 and how people liked it.
And if whoever has misdesigned the current SOTW UI dares to use the words "ergonomics" or "usability" I shall pummel him/her with the pointy end of my spare alto clarinet mouthpiece. What a bloaty ghastly sight! Me eyes indeed.
New vs Old releases
Forty years of more or less close involvement with IT have convinced me not to underestimate the danger of using old versions of a software, especially one like this one which is highly dependant of other elements (developments in the Internet, new browsers, viruses, etc.), even if one may feel regularly highjacked by the supplier of these new releases.
And I'm betting somebody will soon remark that Woof looks a bit corny compared to SOTW...
Forty years of more or less close involvement with IT have convinced me not to underestimate the danger of using old versions of a software, especially one like this one which is highly dependant of other elements (developments in the Internet, new browsers, viruses, etc.), even if one may feel regularly highjacked by the supplier of these new releases.
And I'm betting somebody will soon remark that Woof looks a bit corny compared to SOTW...
It's a bit hard to see much there and fin things, but I recommend to avoid all the dark ones and generally go with something that is clear like the current version. Some of the blue ones seem comfortable. I like the idea that the background is brightest, post background second, other areas third and everything else (words writte, titles, etc.) are darkest. I'm colourblind and the new SOTW layout is definitely less comfortable than before. I like a bright background but especially not enough contrast for some of the things compared with the background or with themselves (like new posts vs no new posts). I can say the current Woodwind Forum version is very colourblind friendly. The only thing I liked better about the older SOTW was the 'quick reply' instead of having to click and go to another page to reply.
don't worry ... you could always compare it to the Clarinet BBoard
That may be true, but then again it loads faster and renders better in different kinds of browsers, just because there's less eye candy to take care of...
I'm not quite sure what you mean by this. Can you explain a little more?
First, I can load a bunch of styles and you can pick and choose which ones you like for yourself. As long as it's free and marked "supported", I have no problems installing it.
Second, the "quick reply" is a global setting. I think we've got it turned off ....
There are vBulletin themes that are "load" friendly. If you search a bit on vbulletin.org, I'm sure you'll see a couple.
Or not. It'll take you too long to load
. I'll try to find one for ya.
And you have to either look up or figure out the square bracket commands for links, photos and the like. That would seem to keep that stuff off the forum more than if it were easy to do using *modern* icons instead of coding on the fly.
Don't care as long as you keep 'Mean Green'.There are vBulletin themes that are "load" friendly. If you search a bit on vbulletin.org, I'm sure you'll see a couple.
Or not. It'll take you too long to load
I believe there is actually science to support this.