New website design

[Julia]

Tech, it's still there.

On right hand side above the market summary

No, it's only on the Home Page. This means that if you are reading a thread about a particular stock and want to check the chart etc, you have to exit that thread and go back to the Home Page, look up what you want, and then get back to the thread.

Joe, could you please have a look at this? It really is annoying.
With thanks
Julia

 

[Joe Blow]

Joe, could you please have a look at this? It really is annoying.

Hi Julia,

My apologies but I'm currently snowed under dealing with other issues related to the new design. It's going to require additional coding to be able to make the stock quote box available on every page again. It may also be a little difficult to re-implement but I promise I will look into it as soon as I have all the other issues sorted out.

Joe I can plainly see what your up against here.
https://www.aussiestockforums.com/forums/showpost.php?p=287562&postcount=12

This will need some thinking to get around. A policy about greater than 800 pixel pics pulled if an auto software function is not available? Or I guess you will have to pull that feature as well?

Hi TH,

Yes, it's quite a complicated situation and my primary concern is that attached images are presented to ASF's members in the most useful/detailed way. I hate to see oversized images resized to the point that people can't make heads nor tails of them. It seems to defeat the purpose of attaching images in the first place. Sadly, I am constrained by the limitations of this forum software and it's either thumbnails or 800 pixel wide images. I'm in favour of thumbnails because it will allow people to view attachments in the dimensions they were originally created in. I know it's slightly inconvenient but I think the advantages outweigh the negatives. Of course, should people insist on no thumbnails I am prepared to go with the wishes of the majority but I suspect if I change things back I will have just as many people telling me they preferred the clickable thumbnails.

I'm beginning to think the only way to solve this issue is with a poll.

 

[Trembling Hand]

I'm beginning to think the only way to solve this issue is with a poll.

Yes I was going to ask about that but it could be dangerous. You know a good politician does call an inquiry unless they know the out come :

 

[Joules MM1]

Nice design.......

 

[nomore4s]

Yes I was going to ask about that but it could be dangerous. You know a good politician does call an inquiry unless they know the out come :

lol,

I actually like the thumbnails, as I've got dual screens I can open the image and view it on one screen and read the thread on the other.
But I do understand other peoples frustrations, as at work I've only got one screen and it's not so convenient there:

Good luck Joe

 

[justjohn]

JOE-is it me or are the names in the last post column a different type ,they seem fuzzy or is it at 48 I finally need glasses:brille: otherwise its a great change:

 

[Timmy]

Nice work on removing the Union flag from the background Joe - I like the Southern Cross instead and its more appropriate for an Aust. forum - thanks a lot.

 

[dojara]

LOOKS BEWWWWDIFUL:dance:

 

[Kremmen]

Looks nice, but still has two annoying bugs/misfeatures from the old setup:

1) Displaying/reading/etc "aussiestockforums.com" works fine, but logging in doesn't. To log in, one has to use "www.aussiestockforums.com". This is simply bad and requires extra typing for no reason. It's easy enough to either get rid of the requirement to use the www version or do an automatic redirect from the base name to the www name.

2) Forcing the pages to be so wide, so that anyone viewing in a window that's not full-screen has to scroll sideways. It's tedious and totally unnecessary, both for HTML in general and this board software in particular.

(eg. see flyertalk.com/forums for a site which does both properly)

 

[Joe Blow]

Looks nice, but still has two annoying bugs/misfeatures from the old setup:

1) Displaying/reading/etc "aussiestockforums.com" works fine, but logging in doesn't. To log in, one has to use "www.aussiestockforums.com". This is simply bad and requires extra typing for no reason. It's easy enough to either get rid of the requirement to use the www version or do an automatic redirect from the base name to the www name.

2) Forcing the pages to be so wide, so that anyone viewing in a window that's not full-screen has to scroll sideways. It's tedious and totally unnecessary, both for HTML in general and this board software in particular.

(eg. see flyertalk.com/forums for a site which does both properly)

Hi Kremmen,

I will see what I can do about the log in problem from aussiestockforums.com. I can't imagine it would be too hard to fix.

Regarding the width of ASF, unfortunately I have had to optimise for screen resolutions of 1024x768 and above. According to my statistics, only 2-3% of ASF users have screen resolutions of 800x600 and many have them set quite high (see attachment) so I have had to leave 800x600 behind. My apologies.

It's shame you're not in Brisbane. I have an old 17" CRT monitor I'm about the throw out because nobody I know wants it.

 

[Trembling Hand]

Joe how come my screen res isn't in your stats, 4660 X 1600.

 

[Joe Blow]

Joe how come my screen res isn't in your stats, 4660 X 1600.

That's just the top 10.... this one is the largest in the last month.

 

[Trembling Hand]

That's just the top 10.... this one is the largest in the last month.

Wow thats bigger than mine I'm going to have to reconfigure and get 7600 X 1600. :

 

[Sir Burr]

Thanks for the larger arrows (Last Post, Home page)

My trembling hand had trouble to point at those 2 or 3 pixels

 

[Scuba]

Got a bit miffed at the Pommie bashing, but Crucis (Southern cross) looks great.
Thanks for the great site again Joe...
Regards,
Scuba

 

[jtb]

Like it Joe, well done

 

[macca]

Hi Joe,

When I actually enter a forum, threads with new posts are bolder than the old ones, which is good (even if they are still green )

When on the main page of the forums I can't see any difference in those that have new posts since my last visit and those that don't.

At the moment I look at the times of the last post but I thought on the old layout a forum with a new post was in bold type, am I missing something ?

Thanks

 

[Agentm]

joe,

can the thumbnails be an option? i prefer to have maps and charts on the thread. up close and visable

my view is tha if your posting a map or a TA chart the thing you want to see is the chart, so when your reading it its there in front of you..

imho if your trying to flick between chart and commentary your either going to get sick of it pretty quickly and not even bother..

i notice there is a lack of ta charts appearing now..

how do you view it..

 

[Joe Blow]

Hi Joe,

When I actually enter a forum, threads with new posts are bolder than the old ones, which is good (even if they are still green )

When on the main page of the forums I can't see any difference in those that have new posts since my last visit and those that don't.

At the moment I look at the times of the last post but I thought on the old layout a forum with a new post was in bold type, am I missing something ?

Hi Macca,

I will look into this and see what I can do.

joe,

can the thumbnails be an option? i prefer to have maps and charts on the thread. up close and visable

my view is tha if your posting a map or a TA chart the thing you want to see is the chart, so when your reading it its there in front of you..

imho if your trying to flick between chart and commentary your either going to get sick of it pretty quickly and not even bother..

i notice there is a lack of ta charts appearing now..

how do you view it..

Unfortunately I have to decide between thumbnails or larger images. This forum software doesn't do both. The only problem with larger images is that they can only be a maximum of around 800 pixels wide which is probably going to be too small for many people on higher screen resolutions especially if they are automatically resized by the forum software. With thumbnails the maximum width of attached images is currently set to 1200 pixels wide.

I am still considering which way to go with it. Some people prefer thumbnails and some don't so whichever way I decide some people are going to be disappointed.

 

[Kremmen]

Regarding the width of ASF, unfortunately I have had to optimise for screen resolutions of 1024x768 and above. According to my statistics, only 2-3% of ASF users have screen resolutions of 800x600 and many have them set quite high (see attachment) so I have had to leave 800x600 behind. My apologies.

Firstly, to "optimise" is fine. Making it lousy for anything less is not optimising and (as shown by other sites) it's not necessary.

Secondly, you're totally missing the point with those stats. I run a screen resolution higher than 1024x768 too. But I have a number of other windows open for other applications and never run my browser in full-screen mode. It's called multi-tasking. I've seen polls suggesting that about 50% of users run their browsers full-screen. For the other 50%, the screen resolution is totally irrelevant except as an upper limit.

Do you have stats on what size people's browser window is? Even then, that would be misleading, as users will be making their browser window bigger on this site precisely because it works so poorly otherwise.