Huh. I'm using Firefox, and it's way smaller than it was before.
Well, true, but how about light blue not just in the message background but everywhere? Or a medium blue where there is now white. Soft on the eyes, and no white space.
White Space Reduction Act Of 2014
- Thread starter harshness
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Replies 44
- Views 3K
- Status
Huh. I'm using Firefox, and it's way smaller than it was before.
Well, true, but how about light blue not just in the message background but everywhere? Or a medium blue where there is now white. Soft on the eyes, and no white space.
I think you guys are REALLY going to like what I have been working on all day today. 
I will release it to the public when I do a few more tweaks to it, but a lot of the staff have been using it all day and they REALLY like it. (Some said they LOVE it!!)
I will release it to the public when I do a few more tweaks to it, but a lot of the staff have been using it all day and they REALLY like it.
(Some said they LOVE it!!) 
One of the big killers seems to be the bio location. Many take three lines to get the information across.
Could some of this bio information be reasonably moved to the post box (or its own box) at the bottom of each message so that it can stretch across the page instead of down?
It is unusual to see the post information at the end of a message.
Could some of this bio information be reasonably moved to the post box (or its own box) at the bottom of each message so that it can stretch across the page instead of down?
It is unusual to see the post information at the end of a message.
The only ones that seem to take (3) lines are with people who type random stuff in the box.
The post information under the message is just in a different location. Every forum software I've seen will include the date/time it was posted. I'm not sure why the username is repeated there though !
The post information under the message is just in a different location. Every forum software I've seen will include the date/time it was posted. I'm not sure why the username is repeated there though !
Scott's location contains just the city and state yet it takes three lines to get it out. Only a couple of us fit on a single line.
That's all I was saying.
When I read the topic I thought it was about white spaces for broadband. I use CTRL + to make text bigger and to fill pages if need be.
This new layout goes a very long way toward the end of reducing wasted display real estate. I think the end result is more appealing without missing anything critical.That will be fixed in a few minutes.
Your effort in this is much appreciated.
LOL! Are we technical around here, or what?
Doesn't that setting screw up all other websites?
The question you should be asking and answering is why do you have to zoom on some Websites and not all sites?
Its because the design / layout / font / color / etc etc etc are not as good from one site to the next.
eg, its hard reading the test on SatGuys ... the font used (which is *not* user changeable <yet>) is too serifed and kerned too tightly.
Its one thing to increase the size so that you can point out something to someone standing over your shoulder, or for presentation screens, and for *just one or two pages*, but having to change for just one web site as a whole? That's plain nutz!!
The default of *ANY* non-artistic website should be set for easiest read-ability, and thus far, this upgrade has failed. Text is far too hard to read and it shouldn't be, not in 2014 ..
There's no "classic" or "default" that allows you to turn off that top nav .. all of the ones with the NAV off are currently the wider-formatted ones (no love with that wide format either).
The color palette .. while "great, it offers 4 independant color choices" ... doesn't give you a good selection of paired pallets ... so if you want something generally lighter, you get no guidance, you have to individually hit and miss on each color. And there is no post background color selection it seems as none of the four dots seemed to change the light blue.
The fluid views have a different default margin... presumed this is by percentage.
In changing from SatelliteGuys to SatelliteGuys "Fluid" the margin goes from 1 inch down to 1/4th of an inch.
This 1/4th scale sticks with the "Fluid" view while the Non-Fluid view adapts to a narrow or wider margin (white space) as you grow or shrink the browser window sides.
All I see to the left now are users' avatars, names, custom titles, member groups and likes received. It looks OK in my book. I would actually like to see their post count, too (I know, post count doesn't really matter but I like seeing it anyway.) The only time I could see it as a problem is on a smaller device in portrait mode, or on a smaller, lower-resolution screen using Aero Snap. Is there a mobile version of the site? I haven't looked at the site on my iPad/iPhone yet, as I just use TapaTalk anyway.
I have lots of different monitors/desktops/laptops/devices with all different resolutions. The site is a little jumbled on a 1024x768 screen, not too bad though. But who uses that resolution these days? On PC I mostly use it on 1360x768 and 1900x1200 screens. On the lower resolution, Aero Snap requires a bit more scrolling, but 1360x768 isn't that great for multiple windows anyway. Everything's great on 1900x1200, IMO 1900x1200 is superior to 1920x1080 any day. It's a shame that manufacturers are cheaping out and switching everything to 16:9. 16:10 is far better for multitasking IME. I'm glad I grabbed all the 16:10 monitors I needed while I had the chance!
I have lots of different monitors/desktops/laptops/devices with all different resolutions. The site is a little jumbled on a 1024x768 screen, not too bad though. But who uses that resolution these days? On PC I mostly use it on 1360x768 and 1900x1200 screens. On the lower resolution, Aero Snap requires a bit more scrolling, but 1360x768 isn't that great for multiple windows anyway. Everything's great on 1900x1200, IMO 1900x1200 is superior to 1920x1080 any day. It's a shame that manufacturers are cheaping out and switching everything to 16:9. 16:10 is far better for multitasking IME. I'm glad I grabbed all the 16:10 monitors I needed while I had the chance!
We're missing something somewhere.
I do not want the top nav bar.
The option to use the "Fluid" version doesn't work for me, because that then also shifts the width of the view to remove that 1 inch space I prefer to have. (enlarging or reducing the width of my browser window does not change the width of the *fluid* view's boarders to be anywhere near 1 inch wide - but doing so under the default view, with nav, there is almost always a 1 inch boarder on each side)
If you're going to say that the 1 inch is because there is a top bar creates it, then adjust the understanding of the desire as I want the 1 inch margin left & right, and without the nav bar creating it.
- Status
