New Forum Sneak Peek!

sbirks23

Thanks so much for the previews! Reassuring to see the homepage, thread reply and board view competitions view's are more like the original minimal whitespace green style :T (I'm an original green style user, also using max-width to adapt the forum layout so the site fills on my screen without just making the font larger.)

However Thread View Fullscreen shows the Quote, Thanks, Report buttons as large in comparison to the post itself, resulting in lots of whitespace / repetitive items taking up screenspace. As a regular comp'er, I skim-read 100's of threads and quickly scroll through multiple pages, as I know many others do too. So these buttons being nearly as large as the text in the post itself seems disproportionate and unnecessary. Please could they be adjusted to be less 'stand-out' and therefore easier to read the actual relevant text on my laptop screen ie the post content itself.

https://www.moneysavingexpert.com/content/dam/mse/forum/screenshots/thread-view-fullscreen.png?_ga=2.82097750.1318949097.1580456863-1950154312.1564925137

I appreciate you reviewing and taking on board the various feedback from a multitude of users, fingers crossed this makes it through to the developers and UI designers too. :hello:

The ability to order search results by 'Thread title', 'Descending' etc is really really useful for comp'ing as a way to ensure you've not missed any. Please have this on the new site too, thanks

jamesd

mattytun wrote: »

Hi on the old site i've only got 14.9KB to upload a Avatar picture will the new website be giving us more space for profile pictures.

I hope not. Even 14.9k is quite unfriendly. Some 35 replies and if all had a different 14.9k avatar that'd be 521k just in avatars on one topic to download and cache on possibly high bandwidth cost and low storage devices.

Avatars are only 80x80 pixels and at one byte per pixel that takes only 6.25k before the compression built into images. 16 bit high colour would take 12.5k before compression. So the current limit seems sufficient for the image dimensions even without image compression.

What would you want to do that needs more than every pixel in the avatar being unique in 16 bit colour?

"Note: The maximum size of your custom image is 80 by 80 pixels or 32.0 KB (whichever is smaller)."

jamesd

DoaM wrote: »

Looks OK - as long as the width is using most of the monitor width.

I hope they don't make the mistake of assuming that the width available to use is the physical screen pixel width (3000 for me usually) or the logical display width (possibly tens of thousands with multiple monitors and/or virtual displays). Browser available width is the one to use. For me that's normally a bit under half of the display resolution, around 1200-1300 pixels.

Since it's to be mobile friendly it presumably is handling that and the way letter pixel sizes vary depending on display DPI well. Trying to use the same letter pixel sizes on a 15" HD laptop and 6" retina display* phone or 30" retina display monitor wouldn't work well.

* Apple marketing language for a display that's supposed to have a resolution at least as high as some human eye can perceive at the intended viewing distance.

jamesd

sbirks23 wrote: »

However Thread View Fullscreen shows the Quote, Thanks, Report buttons as large in comparison to the post itself, resulting in lots of whitespace / repetitive items taking up screenspace. As a regular comp'er, I skim-read 100's of threads and quickly scroll through multiple pages

In your screen shot most of the vertical white space waste comes from the information about the poster setting the minimum post height. A problem in the current forum as well, though turning off avatar display helps in the current version.

That could be improved by having post and thank counts as a single wrapped paragraph. The four numbers in circles, whatever they are, might be merged to the left of the text "Forumite". I don't know why the post count is given twice. Removing the upper one and making the one near to thanks an exact number would free up more useful vertical space to make posts with little text smaller vertically.

The buttons are big enough compared to text in the post to disrupt the reading flow, I agree. Moving them to the right like the current green skin should help with that, so there isn't a button where the read left to right text of the next post is expected.

DoaM

jamesd wrote: »

Browser available width is the one to use.

That's actually what I meant. (And is what web pages will natively utilise)

DoaM

jamesd wrote: »

I don't know why the post count is given twice.

At first I thought you'd misinterpreted the screenshots but when I look again I see what you mean. (In the current - green - skin it shows post count and then thanks vs posts thanked. The screenshots seem to relate the thanks to the number of posts, not posts thanked ... unless that's just a foible with the examples used for the screenshots).

jamesd

DoaM wrote: »

At first I thought you'd misinterpreted the screenshots but when I look again I see what you mean. (In the current - green - skin it shows post count and then thanks vs posts thanked. The screenshots seem to relate the thanks to the number of posts, not posts thanked ... unless that's just a foible with the examples used for the screenshots).

Yes, could be that tbe posts count next to thanks count will become the thanked count like "Thanked 8,674 Times in 4,881 Posts" vs Posts: 8,773 for you at the moment.

mattytun

jamesd wrote: »

I hope not. Even 14.9k is quite unfriendly. Some 35 replies and if all had a different 14.9k avatar that'd be 521k just in avatars on one topic to download and cache on possibly high bandwidth cost and low storage devices.

Avatars are only 80x80 pixels and at one byte per pixel that takes only 6.25k before the compression built into images. 16 bit high colour would take 12.5k before compression. So the current limit seems sufficient for the image dimensions even without image compression.

What would you want to do that needs more than every pixel in the avatar being unique in 16 bit colour?

"Note: The maximum size of your custom image is 80 by 80 pixels or 32.0 KB (whichever is smaller)."

Most sites im on have At least 200x200 pixels. / 400x400 pixels.

savingwannabe

hello thank you all for your hard work. It looks impressive.:beer::j I am not sure where I will be posting but it wont take long for me to start when I figure it out. lol.

webjaved

Looks awesome!