Forum Update

Errata

I'm only a serf, so there's no point in me saying I don't like it. What I will say is that it looks bizarre and amateurish.

mo786uk

More support for full width here - good that you kept it

Can you not make the 2 boxes collapsable - the IMPORTANT This is an open forum' and 'How to contact us' - ocne you have seen them not sure they need to be there wasting space.

the enw masthead is too big - why not just have a button to take you back to the mai nsite - but can live with it if you got rid of the 2 boxes

System

To use an argument that fixed width is to aid future development is a cop out since it is a massive step backwards. Why do you think people spend more money to get high resolution widescreen systems ?
Hint : It isn't so that poor web developers can limit their viewing experience

MSE_Martin

Fifer wrote: »

Sorry Martin, but it's not change people are complaining about, it's deteriorating function and usability. I can understand the move to fixed width. I can't understand why the fixed width only uses less than 40% of most people's screen width.

The fixed width is set at standard web dimensions - you'll find almost all big editorial sites and many forum / social networking sites are fixed width too.

This isn't an MSE on its own - actually we've been in the minority a long time.

I accept some won't like it. I would ask you to try it. Yet if you hate it choose the stretchy option. We can't say fairer than allowing you to choose.

Mikeyorks

I feel as though I need to read it sideways, it's so narrow!

I don't mind 'fixed width' it's the 'ridiculously narrow fixed width with gaping margins' .... that doesn't make a lot of sense.

Off to have a stretch.

Later.

Phew - that's better. Getting value for money out of the monitor screen size again!

shimmeringsky

Stretchy is much better, the fixed width is just a waste of space , as others have said whats the point of having a decent size sceen when only the middle is used and the outside edge is blank. I have changed it over but means I have to log in all the time to view it properly now.

Seems like not many like the slim fit version , would be better if it was stretchy by default and slimfit by options !

freyasmum

vicx wrote: »

I am the only one who thinks it looks better (on a 15" laptop).

It will do if it was designed for smaller screens - it looks brilliant on my phone as well.

But I'm guessing quite a few users have bigger screens - the money we're all saving here has enabled us to big huge computer :rotfl: and it does look itty bitty in the middle of the screen compared to before

jem16

Perhaps you could give us a link of other forums.social networking sites that use this particular fixed width because I haven't seen any yet.

What like Facebook, mumsnet (its smaller than ours), netmums, Av forums (slightly wider).

MSE_Martin

Mikeyorks wrote: »

I feel as though I need to read it sideways, it's so narrow!

I don't mind 'fixed width' it's the 'ridiculously narrow fixed width with gaping margins' .... that doesn't make a lot of sense.

Unless there's some error - its not ridiculously narrow its set at standard 1024 type width. Go and check the time or telegraph or guardian and you'll see they're the same size. Its just the fact its not what people are used to here.

I know I can say until Im blue in the face - try it, wait and see, its far better for readability.

DVardysShadow

MSE_Forum_Manager wrote: »

"I hate fixed width"

We would ask you to try it for a week.

I tried it for 30 seconds.

It is horrid and I have changed it back to stretchy. Fully 50% of the width of my screen is blank. The width of the text on a post is less than 40% of the width of a screen.

I seriously doubt you have any features which are so compelling that you would make me want to change it back.

If you remember back to when Google took over from Yahoo and Excite[??] as the search engine of choice, it was because Yahoo and Excite got so self absorbed about their features that they drowned the content the users wanted with all kinds of drivel. And Google just took over because people visit for content, not drivel.

Martin, sexy this is not, and if you have any sense you will tell your web people that if their features and tools won't work with stretchy pages, then they go on pages of their own.