Log In · Register

 
7 Pages V  « < 4 5 6 7 >  
Reply to this topicStart new topic
Welcome to CB 4.5!
Tomates
post Nov 21 2008, 08:57 PM
Post #126


poison
*******

Group: Official Member
Posts: 4,805
Joined: Mar 2008
Member No: 629,020



i still wish it wasnt as wide though
 
synatribe
post Nov 21 2008, 08:59 PM
Post #127


AIDS at RAVES.
******

Group: Official Designer
Posts: 2,386
Joined: Dec 2007
Member No: 598,878



QUOTE(Deetard @ Nov 15 2008, 03:38 PM) *
this has nothing to do with web 2.0. web 2.0 is now used more for portfolio websites, and instead of scrolling vertically, it's the new thing to scroll it horizontally. this, however, is an online forum. stop with the web 2.0 bullshit.

web 2.0 means that its the users putting content on the web page instead of a admin, like myspace, youtube, CREATEBLOG. web 1.0 is when there is a single admin for a site ex:] blog sites. When portfolio sites talk about making their site look web 2.0 it means nicer borders and wider width and cleaner, less clutterred space, portfolio sites go for the look not the trend. so techincally createblog was trying to go for a web 2.0 look and it looks nice. Horizontal has been a trend in the 90's and is SLOWLY coming back
 
Mikeplyts
post Nov 21 2008, 09:03 PM
Post #128


Mel Blanc was allergic to carrots.
*******

Group: Official Designer
Posts: 6,371
Joined: Aug 2008
Member No: 676,291



^I agree.
 
synatribe
post Nov 21 2008, 09:07 PM
Post #129


AIDS at RAVES.
******

Group: Official Designer
Posts: 2,386
Joined: Dec 2007
Member No: 598,878



QUOTE(paperplane @ Nov 21 2008, 08:35 AM) *
Facebook is portioned off so that when you have your screen windowed, it doesn't matter whether half of the site is on there. But when you try to read forum posts that take up 2/3 of the screen, there is an annoyingly large amount of right-left scrolling to be done. It's a long way to read across in general; no blog optimized for 1024x768 is going to have the text go across nearly the whole width of the page. After all, we may not be stupid enough to still be viewing in 800x600, but it makes a lot of sense not to have the browser window maximized at all times.

I don't really know how you can expect to make changes for the silent majority and not get complaints from the vocal minority when the changes are to our disadvantage.

If most people don't use the forums, and those of us who do are complaining, why can you not just do whatever you want with the front page and make the forums narrower?
ps irregardless is a double negative

because they are considered radicals :] who have probably never had their way in a democracy :]
 
micron
post Nov 22 2008, 12:36 AM
Post #130


cb's #1 fan! =)
******

Group: Advisor
Posts: 2,341
Joined: Nov 2003
Member No: 1



QUOTE(brooklyneast05 @ Nov 21 2008, 08:23 AM) *
oh ok
so are we not going to use cb designers banners anymore on the top in place of the add like what was first proposed?

yes we will, sorry for the delay. i agree, it IS an eyesore. in the past, cb never had any ads on the front page and i would like to keep it that way. =)


QUOTE(paperplane @ Nov 21 2008, 08:35 AM) *
If most people don't use the forums, and those of us who do are complaining, why can you not just do whatever you want with the front page and make the forums narrower?
ps irregardless is a double negative

uniformity is important. if i understand correctly, images can be shrunk via css relative to their original dimensions (ie 75%). ill read up on this and if this is the case, youll get your daytime thin version.


QUOTE(ChaoticHeartCrash @ Nov 21 2008, 10:18 AM) *
I still keep getting bad query on the tracker.

hi, can you tell me the steps to duplicate this problem so that i can fix it? thanks!


QUOTE(Markster @ Nov 21 2008, 02:36 PM) *


On Firefox, Mac.

But if you're still in the process of fixing this, then please just disregard this post.

oh thanks for notifying me, ill fix this shortly. its because macs and linux doesnt have the font arial. ill have to work around it using css.
 
rnicron
post Nov 22 2008, 04:02 PM
Post #131


Senior Member
*******

Group: Staff Alumni
Posts: 4,095
Joined: Jul 2005
Member No: 171,080



QUOTE(micron @ Nov 21 2008, 06:25 AM) *
um.. ok. good for you, wanna cookie?
you've turned into a fucking douche.
 
micron
post Nov 24 2008, 03:37 AM
Post #132


cb's #1 fan! =)
******

Group: Advisor
Posts: 2,341
Joined: Nov 2003
Member No: 1



QUOTE(Deetard @ Nov 22 2008, 04:02 PM) *
you've turned into a fucking douche.

sorry (seriously). i was cranky.


QUOTE(decaydancefbr @ Nov 22 2008, 08:40 PM) *
I read through this but I don't know if I got everything, but when are we getting the skins back?

And everyone that's mad about the width, for now when you go on Createblog hold the Ctrl key and use the scroll thing on the mouse and scroll down one and it will shrink everything a bit and it's like having the old width.

the styles are back in the main site, but not yet on the forums.

also, the zoom option is pretty interesting, although i must say that the font is a bit too small for my liking when its zoomed out 75%. how do you people who want a thinner version feel about this? maybe itll be easier just to make the fonts a tad bit bigger so that ill look fine on 75%.
 
Gigi
post Nov 24 2008, 03:47 AM
Post #133


in a matter of time
*******

Group: Staff Alumni
Posts: 7,151
Joined: Aug 2005
Member No: 191,357



Hmm, well everything else looks smaller too including avatars and pictures, emoticons, etc. We should go for one or the other and not a weird middle compromise. It does look good though.
 
hi-C
post Nov 24 2008, 10:30 AM
Post #134


Amberific.
********

Group: Staff Alumni
Posts: 12,913
Joined: Jul 2004
Member No: 29,772



Can we get the "My Controls ˇ View New Posts ˇ My Assistant ˇ Live Chat ˇ 0 New Messages" row of links to appear in the non-forum parts?

Also, I don't think the font needs to be any bigger for those who zoom out. If they do that that's their fault.
 
*paperplane*
post Nov 24 2008, 01:21 PM
Post #135





Guest






Yeah, I forgot you could zoom. Ok, problem solved. See, I am compromising :)
But yes, it probably would be nice if the font were a bit bigger to compensate
 
micron
post Nov 24 2008, 06:05 PM
Post #136


cb's #1 fan! =)
******

Group: Advisor
Posts: 2,341
Joined: Nov 2003
Member No: 1



^ hey did you try zooming out on mozilla. it seems better than IE.

zoom out once


zoom out twice
 
rnicron
post Nov 24 2008, 06:06 PM
Post #137


Senior Member
*******

Group: Staff Alumni
Posts: 4,095
Joined: Jul 2005
Member No: 171,080



doesn't work on mac. problem not solved.
 
Tomates
post Nov 24 2008, 06:07 PM
Post #138


poison
*******

Group: Official Member
Posts: 4,805
Joined: Mar 2008
Member No: 629,020



wait how can you zoom?
 
micron
post Nov 24 2008, 06:15 PM
Post #139


cb's #1 fan! =)
******

Group: Advisor
Posts: 2,341
Joined: Nov 2003
Member No: 1



QUOTE(Deetard @ Nov 24 2008, 06:06 PM) *
doesn't work on mac. problem not solved.

download firefox if safari doesnt have a zoom function.


QUOTE(Tomates @ Nov 24 2008, 06:07 PM) *
wait how can you zoom?

for IE: page menu -> zoom (or bottom right corner)
for firefox: view menu -> zoom
 
micron
post Nov 25 2008, 05:15 PM
Post #140


cb's #1 fan! =)
******

Group: Advisor
Posts: 2,341
Joined: Nov 2003
Member No: 1



surprise surprise, guess what youtube's new width is? rolleyes.gif

(told you so, about sites increasingly moving to optimize for 1024x768.)
 
brooklyneast05
post Nov 25 2008, 05:18 PM
Post #141


I'm Jc
********

Group: Mentor
Posts: 13,619
Joined: Jul 2006
Member No: 437,556



yeah and people are usually watching a video, which doesn't require you to see the whole width of the layout anyway for those people who like to minimize windows. they can watch just the video. unlike a forum where you have to view the whole width to read responses/reply.


just sayin, they prob don't think of it the same way.
 
micron
post Nov 25 2008, 05:21 PM
Post #142


cb's #1 fan! =)
******

Group: Advisor
Posts: 2,341
Joined: Nov 2003
Member No: 1



^ like i said before, this site isnt primarily a forum website. its a layout website. and like videos, for layout thumbnails (and browsing), bigger is better.

http://www.youtube.com/blog?entry=0i22UDAOfj8
 
micron
post Nov 25 2008, 05:22 PM
Post #143


cb's #1 fan! =)
******

Group: Advisor
Posts: 2,341
Joined: Nov 2003
Member No: 1



on another note, would you like it if the side column (profile info next to each post) was wider to make the post column thinner? this i can do right away.
 
*paperplane*
post Nov 25 2008, 05:26 PM
Post #144





Guest






QUOTE(micron @ Nov 24 2008, 06:05 PM) *
^ hey did you try zooming out on mozilla. it seems better than IE.

zoom out once
http://jusunlee.com/cb45/870.gif

zoom out twice
http://jusunlee.com/cb45/780.gif

I always use firefox and it looks fine, but if you were offering I certainly wouldn't object to bigger font for zooming purposes.

I agree with JC. and yes, place do whatever you can to make the post column thinner. Any way to get the fast reply thinner too?
 
micron
post Nov 25 2008, 05:41 PM
Post #145


cb's #1 fan! =)
******

Group: Advisor
Posts: 2,341
Joined: Nov 2003
Member No: 1



^ hows this (expanded the side columns from 160px to 200px)? the fast reply form didnt change with the widened width.
 
micron
post Nov 25 2008, 10:51 PM
Post #146


cb's #1 fan! =)
******

Group: Advisor
Posts: 2,341
Joined: Nov 2003
Member No: 1



minor update to the layout browse,

when you hover your mouse over the layout screenshot, youll now see the submit date, view count, fav count, and comment count. have tested on ie7, firefox2, and chrome. please let me know if it breaks anything (if youre using a different browser). remember to refresh your browser to make sure the new css is loaded first! =)

 
LoveToMySilas
post Nov 26 2008, 06:34 PM
Post #147


That's what she said.
*******

Group: Staff Alumni
Posts: 3,559
Joined: Apr 2005
Member No: 130,200



I actually like the new look alot. Its a lot easier to find things, imo. ph34r.gif You forgot to add, "bring back arcade", to your to do list.
 
hi-C
post Nov 26 2008, 06:41 PM
Post #148


Amberific.
********

Group: Staff Alumni
Posts: 12,913
Joined: Jul 2004
Member No: 29,772



QUOTE(micron @ Nov 25 2008, 05:41 PM) *
^ hows this (expanded the side columns from 160px to 200px)? the fast reply form didnt change with the widened width.
Since the side columns are bigger can we have bigger avatars?
 
Maccabee
post Dec 2 2008, 05:24 PM
Post #149


Senior Member
*******

Group: Official Designer
Posts: 5,880
Joined: Nov 2007
Member No: 593,382



Ummm i found something wrong.
SOmeone submmitted a layout with a rather long name and its wider than its preview pic and now the layouts on the layouts page arent in order and stuff.

Just check it out and youll see what i mean.

Its the reeses layout thats doin it.
 
rnicron
post Dec 2 2008, 05:45 PM
Post #150


Senior Member
*******

Group: Staff Alumni
Posts: 4,095
Joined: Jul 2005
Member No: 171,080



umm
looks
fine
to
me
 

7 Pages V  « < 4 5 6 7 >
Reply to this topicStart new topic
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members: