Forum Suggestions & User Assistance - My eyes hurt

I don't have a problem with upgrading the functionality of the forum, but the new look is painful on the eyes. I imagine it could cause damage over time.

The old look was a simple text format without all sorts of bubbles and acoutrements. Please give us an option like that. A new look would be fine, just not one like this.

agreed. 2nded. +1. etc.

Think about what the actual problem is. I think it's a big difference in font sizes. For instance, on the New Posts page, the Post Titles are very large fonts, but the snippets of the first posts are in a tiny font. So also in the Quick Reply composition window, the font is much tinier than the other fonts on the page. I think if these few fonts were enlarged just a bit, 99% of the complaints would go away.

Also the subtle fade in the bars from top to bottom gets your eyes.

I don't mind the new colors or the fade of the bars. Like Dohickie says, though, the fonts are fubar. And I really don't like the new huge and pointless thread icon. (I did manage to find the tiny little New Posts button...)

I don't mind the new colors or the fade of the bars. Like Dohickie says, though, the fonts are fubar. And I really don't like the new huge and pointless thread icon. (I did manage to find the tiny little New Posts button...)

The Title icon is huge. I'm still trying to understand the color, open, closed, read, I've posted to it, locked, moved... There is no place that describes that each means.
Also, when I put my curser over it, all I get is a blank box.

The rest of the interface is ok, just new and will take time to get used to it.

I like that the "reply" puts you just below that post and I like the toolbar. :thumb:
I don't know how to use the "multi quote" thing.

Edit: I think I just figured out the multi quote thing. I like that too.

Why should we have to do all the IE size adjustment? Wouldn't it be a simple manner for the mods to adjust the size of the typed print for everyone.

This makes no sense.

Does ANYONE like the teeny type when you enter text to reply or a new thread - is it necessary for bandwidth or something like that. Just seems stupid to me.

Why should we have to do all the IE size adjustment? Wouldn't it be a simple manner for the mods to adjust the size of the typed print for everyone.

This makes no sense.

Does ANYONE like the teeny type when you enter text to reply or a new thread - is it necessary for bandwidth or something like that. Just seems stupid to me.

The in post text size is exactly the same 9 point font as was in the old version.

The in post text size is exactly the same 9 point font as was in the old version.

The in-post text size is fine. The Reply Box text size is teeny tiny. I have to really focus to be able to read what I'm typing here. Why can't the Reply Box (or New Post box) text size be the same as what appears in the post?

The baby blue and faint gray fonts on the opening page suck. There, I said it.

Ditto with hard on the eyes. But I do think it's an exagerration to say that the new format could somehow "cause damage" as the OP said.

I think the thread titles and the forum list pages are the worst. I much preferred bold colors and black letters, sans the bubbly graphics.

Ditto with hard on the eyes. I much preferred bold colors and black letters, sans the bubbly graphics.

I agree. My legs are amazingly strong, but my eyes are crap. This does not help.

Dang, I thought it was only me but this is killing my eyes and I have great vision

Without having done an actual count in the past, I'd say there are only half as many threads visible on one page as there were before. That may be a generous estimate. This is because all the thread titles are rendered in chunky pastel "Fisher-Price" font/appearance. It's horrid.

Ironically, though the graphics are now twice as big, they are also half as useful: the smaller graphics actually made it easier to spot, at a glance, which threads you had replied to...on a page with twice as many threads! The smaller, non-"Fisher-Price'd" thread titles were also easier to peruse. Quicker perception, with fewer user inputs, and greater retention.

That alone, from a human factors standpoint, makes this format an epic "fail". Having worked in human factors in avionics interfaces, I know a little bit about this.

Beyond that, I just tried to scroll this window down, and clipped the corner of that damn vBulletin ad. Fail.

I can't believe I'm about to say this, but this may lead me to bail on this forum. I was so irritated with the human interface that I closed it down out of frustration.

http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1166/1013009328_bc698d1be6_o.jpg
It hurts my eyes too.

The in-post text size is fine. The Reply Box text size is teeny tiny. I have to really focus to be able to read what I'm typing here. Why can't the Reply Box (or New Post box) text size be the same as what appears in the post?

CTRL>Roll your wheel on the mouse while in the editor and watch some magic. :D

CTRL>Roll your wheel on the mouse while in the editor and watch some magic. :D

sweet jumping Buddhas! That's totally screwed up!

Ditto with hard on the eyes. But I do think it's an exagerration to say that the new format could somehow "cause damage" as the OP said.

Its hard to say exactly what features cause the eye stress. The colors seem brighter for one, maybe too bright. The sectioned off bubbles and fades are also disorienting.

As for damage over time, I don't see why it couldn't cause it. If you feel ocular stress almost immediately when looking at the forum, I don't see why sustained viewing couldn't cause damage. Its the same concept as listening to music too loud, stressing the ears.

CTRL>Roll your wheel on the mouse while in the editor and watch some magic. :D

It's the same as <ctrl><plus> or <ctrl><minus>. It changes the page font size, but has no apparent effect on the editor font (other than to increase or decrease it along with the page font).

CTRL>Roll your wheel on the mouse while in the editor and watch some magic.

Ah! Very good, that helped a lot!

I don't have a problem with upgrading the functionality of the forum, but the new look is painful on the eyes. I imagine it could cause damage over time.

The old look was a simple text format without all sorts of bubbles and acoutrements. Please give us an option like that. A new look would be fine, just not one like this.

test reply


agreed. 2nded. +1. etc.

test reply


Think about what the actual problem is. I think it's a big difference in font sizes. For instance, on the New Posts page, the Post Titles are very large fonts, but the snippets of the first posts are in a tiny font. So also in the Quick Reply composition window, the font is much tinier than the other fonts on the page. I think if these few fonts were enlarged just a bit, 99% of the complaints would go away.

test reply



Also the subtle fade in the bars from top to bottom gets your eyes.

test reply

CTRL>Roll your wheel on the mouse while in the editor and watch some magic. :D

I'm using a touchpad on a laptop. Any further suggestions? No wheel.

CTRL>+ or CTRL>-

CTRL>+ or CTRL>-

No go on a Mac.

the problem is NOT the point size, its the contrast. Poor color and density choice for thread titles.

I don't have a problem with the reply text size, but it could stand to be a point or two bigger, as a default.

I had said I would check back in a month, time is running, nothing much to see yet that is any better.

CTRL>+ or CTRL>-

>>>>>>...

I'm in AOL, and all I get is "favorites."

I'll try IE and see what happens

CTRL and + at the same timeor CTRL and - at the same time.
>>>>>>...

I'm in AOL, and all I get is "favorites."

I'll try IE and see what happens

CTRL and + at the same timeor CTRL and - at the same time.

Yes, I tried all permutations, including your suggestioms herein.

It works on IE, but not with AOL.

Yes, I tried all permutations, including your suggestioms herein.

It works on IE, but not with AOL.

But why should I have to do anything? There is so much white space, other stuff, etc., how much space would it take to increase font size 2 points.

Essentially, your message is "Adjust to our incompetence." Also, you need to recognize that not everyone has 20/20.

edit

Aren't there some recognized UI standards in the computer display world? I can't believe that an 8pt?? or 9pt?? type would meet ANY UI standards.

There's also a menu option on the toolbar - under View, I think.

If it works in IE, FF, etc. but not in AOL, then blame AOL.

9-pt is compatible with UI standards, and with 95+% of the eyeballs viewing. Why do you think everyone else should change to correct your problem?

There's also a menu option on the toolbar - under View, I think.

If it works in IE, FF, etc. but not in AOL, then blame AOL.

9-pt is compatible with UI standards, and with 95+% of the eyeballs viewing. Why do you think everyone else should change to correct your problem?

Well, it used to be fine. It isn't now. No one complained before. Lots of folks are complaining now. Do you think that a change for the better? I don't. I would think it is best to make changes for the better, or not at all. If 10 pt improves things for 5% of the population, that is a plus. Do you have problems seeing 10 pt?

The message text font is the same size as it used to be; the edit box font is too small but that's in the to-fix list. The blockquote font may be a bit smaller, along with the user frame text?

It's possible that you set a bigger font size at some point and your browser remembered it, then the new s/w confused it and it went back to normal?? (This is just a guess.)

I see the 9-pt okay and my eyes aren't great. The problem is that a vocal minority(?) browse on small screens and complain about how much space the new look takes up. Enlarging the font would make that worse. It's a balancing act.

The message text font is the same size as it used to be; the edit box font is too small but that's in the to-fix list.


It is the edit text box that is too small. Where did you see it on the "fix-it list?" I must have missed that. Thanks!

When you are scanning the "What's New" page, it's really difficult.

The old format gave you a lot of information in a small space, which was easy to get through.

The new format gives you a lot of information in a very big space, not as easy to scan thru.

Well, it used to be fine. It isn't now. No one complained before. Lots of folks are complaining now. Do you think that a change for the better? I don't. I would think it is best to make changes for the better, or not at all.

And, Why should I have to do anything at all?

+ 1,000 - I thought it was always all about what your customers want. Actual complaints always represent ten times their number!

Don't satisfy them, and go out of business!

It's really simple.

>>>>>>...

I'm in AOL, and all I get is "favorites."

I'll try IE and see what happens



another vote for bringing back the old site.

DF, by the way, this is on our list of changes to implement. Right now, until we get the stability and browser issues resolved, though, we need to stick with the default skin for simplicity in pushing code. That way, we aren't having to rewrite patches every time a new update rolls in to fix a fix all over again.
But why should I have to do anything? There is so much white space, other stuff, etc., how much space would it take to increase font size 2 points.

Essentially, your message is "Adjust to our incompetence." Also, you need to recognize that not everyone has 20/20.

edit

Aren't there some recognized UI standards in the computer display world? I can't believe that an 8pt?? or 9pt?? type would meet ANY UI standards.