Announcing: Slashdot Deals - Explore geek apps, games, gadgets and more. (what is this?)

Thank you!

We are sorry to see you leave - Beta is different and we value the time you took to try it out. Before you decide to go, please take a look at some value-adds for Beta and learn more about it. Thank you for reading Slashdot, and for making the site better!

Come Try Out Slashdot's New Design (In Beta)

timothy posted about a year ago | from the we-show-you-tell dept.

Announcements 1191

Slashdot's biggest redesign effort ever is now in beta and you're invited to help guide it. This redesign has been shaped by feedback from community members over the past few months (a big thanks to those of you who participated in our alpha testing phase!), and we'd like your thoughts on it, too. This new design is meant to be richer but also simpler to use, while maintaining the spirit of what Slashdot is all about: News for Nerds. Stuff that matters. Read on for the details of what's included, or read this blog post. Update: 10/02 19:16 GMT by T : Since this post went live, we've been reading through the comments below as well as your (hundreds!) of emails. These are all valuable, as we continue to implement our current features into the Beta. Keep 'em coming; we love the feedback. Please keep in mind that this is called Beta for a reason; we've still folding in lots of improvements. One important thing to bear in mind is that the images are optional: check out the Classic mode by clicking on the view selection widget (just above the stories) on the Beta page.What's in the Beta?

  • Cleaner, simpler homepage design with option to view stories in three different layouts (Standard, Classic and Headline View)
  • More community-promoted content in the All Stories view
  • Improved profile pages to give you a snapshot of other community members
  • Better, more prominent filters to view stories in different dimensions
  • Easier browsing of popular topics straight from the main page.

Please keep in mind that this is a beta and some features are not yet available or fully baked. For features not yet available, you'll see a "Coming Soon" bubble if you hover your mouse over those areas of the site. Here are a few key areas we are still working on:

  • Sign up
  • moderation
  • story submission
  • replying to comments

Update: 10/01 20:54 GMT by S : For those of you who would rather browse Slashdot without pictures, click the icon at the top right of the story column, and switch to Classic View.

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Link broken? (3, Informative)

Samantha Wright (1324923) | about a year ago | (#45006571)

For some bizarre reason, https: on the link redirects to the current home page.

Who wants to start making tongue-in-cheek remarks about the current layout instead of the new one [slashdot.org] ?

Re:Link broken? (5, Funny)

djupedal (584558) | about a year ago | (#45006603)

If you loved the old design, you'll love the new design...

Re:Link broken? (2)

muttoj (572791) | about a year ago | (#45006789)

All new is per definition bad or evil.
I will stay with the old and trusted design, thank you very much.

OH GOD IT BURNS (5, Insightful)

TangoMargarine (1617195) | about a year ago | (#45006833)

If you loved the old design, you'll hate the new design...


Pastels, rounded edges, and large whitespace stripes on the sides of websites make me gag.

Re:OH GOD IT BURNS (5, Funny)

TangoMargarine (1617195) | about a year ago | (#45006859)

Or are the blank stripes at the sides ads? I've forgotten how the non-AdBlocked live...

Re:Link broken? (1)

torsmo (1301691) | about a year ago | (#45006865)

Yes, it works quite well on my text browser.

Re:Link broken? (5, Insightful)

gl4ss (559668) | about a year ago | (#45006611)

it's fixed now.

but. the new design wastes 50% of my screen.

just make it like it was 10 years ago.

Re:Link broken? (4, Insightful)

intermodal (534361) | about a year ago | (#45006735)

Going back to a design from 10 years ago would give them less opportunity to hide adverts and trackers in the code. It's much easier when the site code is needlessly complex and hard to analize.

Re:Link broken? (3, Insightful)

i kan reed (749298) | about a year ago | (#45006781)

Going back to a design from 10 years ago would give them less opportunity to hide adverts and trackers in the code. It's much easier when the site code is needlessly complex and hard to analize.

That is absolutely part of it, and part of it seems to be the %of screen that is ads. More real estate=more eyes=more mind control=less reason to ever visit the site.

Re:Link broken? (5, Insightful)

Ksevio (865461) | about a year ago | (#45006791)

Not only are there giant white bars down the sides, but all the useless stuff no one reads (and the poll) are always on the side.

It makes the comment section - which is a large part of the slashdot experience - seem like something tacked onto the end of a news article where people post one line responses.

Re:Link broken? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45006907)

I agree ... with the prevalence of widescreen monitors, you'd think a redesign should use horizontal real-estate MORE effectively, not less... Please don't go through with this design...

Re:Link broken? (2)

Sporkinum (655143) | about a year ago | (#45006649)

I got the link in an email, went to it, and the site is broken for me. It did the same thing when they did the alpha as well. I sent them a screen shot.

Nice! (2)

Strange Ranger (454494) | about a year ago | (#45006575)

beta.slashdot.org redirects to slashdot.org.

Perfect. The new beta site is going to be just as popular as ever!

Back out the last upgrade (3)

GodfatherofSoul (174979) | about a year ago | (#45006583)

I liked the last design more.

GOping for frosty! (0, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45006587)

And I would have had it if the new design wasn't so slow.

Digg version 2.0 (5, Insightful)

zitsky (303560) | about a year ago | (#45006593)

If you want the site to look like Digg, maybe you should just buy it.

Re:Digg version 2.0 (5, Insightful)

i kan reed (749298) | about a year ago | (#45006647)

I have to agree, looking like every other "news" site that provides no news is not a good place to go. It deigns to promote everything except what we come to the site to see above the actual stories, and pushes the stories themselves into a narrow column that limits how many you can fit on a screen at time(presumably to boost ad-to-content ratios on screen). Were it not for the fact that I can adblock the header and the whole right column, I'd leave and never come back.

Re:Digg version 2.0 (5, Insightful)

Samantha Wright (1324923) | about a year ago | (#45006771)

The deeper you look, the more obnoxious this gets: try checking the "topics" menu at the top. Off to the right in a corner are the topics people actually care about, but front-and-centre we have the horrible Business Intelligence, Cloud, TV, and Data Center categories that no one cares about. (Okay, so TV turns out a bit of content that's worthwhile sometimes, but it's more usually just nigh-shameless promotional content. Despite all the other pointless and petty blogifications, this off-to-the-side ghettoization of the site's actual content really feels like the biggest subversion of the site's community spirit.

Re:Digg version 2.0 (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45006851)

I'll sell them my wife's blog for half of whatever they'd pay for Digg.

Link is broken (2)

jkflying (2190798) | about a year ago | (#45006597)

The https version redirects to regular /. Use http://beta.slashdot.org [slashdot.org] instead.

In other news, I actually like it. Although it will be hell using lynx...

Re:Link is broken (1)

Samantha Wright (1324923) | about a year ago | (#45006653)

Actually it looks okay in Lynx for the most part. It doesn't even truncate the summaries in standard mode, which is the most obnoxious thing when using a graphical browser. (Guess that requires Javascript.)

the new DIGG redesign. (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45006605)

Goodnight sweet prince, slashdot will be missed.

collapsable comments (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45006633)

collapsable comments would help a lot.

Re:collapsable comments (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45006695)

And the understatement of the year award has now been awarded. :)

Without collapsible comments, the site is unreadable. Being able to give up on a subthread and easily continue on the next is necessary.

Re:collapsable comments (5, Informative)

strength_of_10_men (967050) | about a year ago | (#45006777)


And the redesigned nesting layout makes it harder to follow threads. I'm not exactly sure what others are seeing but my current layout preference has comments nested with clear boxes/lines delineating each, which makes telling what nesting level they belong to.

Re:collapsable comments (1)

Verdatum (1257828) | about a year ago | (#45006927)

My fingers were crossed hoping for this. I've always sorta figured that /. always had collapsible comments, I just wasn't clever enough to figure out what I needed to click to collapse them, and was too lazy to look into it...

It looks alright (0)

gameboyhippo (827141) | about a year ago | (#45006635)

What can I say, I like the more modern design. Now it looks like all of the other sites I visit.

Re:It looks alright (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45006699)

What can I say, I like the more modern design. Now it looks like all of the other sites I visit.

*gasp* Appreciation? Acceptance?!? What are these feelings doing here in Slashdot? OUTSIDER! INTERLOPER! Kill the outsider! Kill! KILL! Throw rocks at the unbeliever! ROCKS! Throw MORE rocks!

Re:It looks alright (5, Insightful)

woodworx (1780214) | about a year ago | (#45006867)

that was the first thing that jumped out at me. 'looks like a couple other news sites I've seen...' I actually like /. the way it is currently. It took me quite a while to get over the most recent change. but I'm used to the way the stories are presented and I don't need pics with the stories on the font page, if I want pics, I'll click thru to the story! I really like the distinctive look Slashdot.org owns in this current iteration. please keep it the way it is. thanks!

How about the old design? (4, Insightful)

h4rr4r (612664) | about a year ago | (#45006643)

Anyway we can go back to 2001 or so with the design?
It just keeps getting worse with every redesign.

Stupd Stories/Comments (0, Troll)

MouseTheLuckyDog (2752443) | about a year ago | (#45006645)

So is it going to stop the stupid comments and accepted submissions?

If not why bother?
You are just Calvin hoping to get a good grade for the nice report cover he bought for his homework.

One request (5, Interesting)

Sigvatr (1207234) | about a year ago | (#45006651)

Just let me use the old design if I want to, then I will be happy.

Agreed. (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45006675)

The new one doesn't look bad, but I'm tired of all the damn changes.

I think it's about time I leave and head over to hacker news or reddit, permanently.


Re:One request (5, Informative)

Spillman (711713) | about a year ago | (#45006835)

I agree. As someone who doesnt have the best vision and generally uses Ctrl-+ a few times in web browsers , I can assure, all those layers start to break and it looks terrible. I've been a happy slashdot reader for 12 years, please don't make me somewhere else. Thanks!

Blog (5, Insightful)

Silpher (1379267) | about a year ago | (#45006655)

It looks like a cheap ass blog...

Re:Blog (0)

intermodal (534361) | about a year ago | (#45006713)

It's worse than that. It looks like a blog using a theme that came with their CMS as the default.

Re:Blog (1)

gbjbaanb (229885) | about a year ago | (#45006887)

Fortunately you can go to the options and enable classic view - at least that's what I did when I saw the beta. The pictures were nice, but I think ArsTechnica does it better, and the chap who does them (Aurich) is awesome.

They still load only a few posts per article, and still don't have a rich editor for posting. I don't really see the point in using the new design.

Oh yea, it's fantastic (4, Informative)

NoImNotNineVolt (832851) | about a year ago | (#45006667)

It looks great on my 14" SVGA CRT.

On my 1920x1080 LCD, it looks retarded. There's as much whitespace running down the sides as there is content running down the middle.

Apparently "Web 2.0" involves designing sites for 9:16 devices. I think someone got that aspect ratio inverted somewhere along the line.

Re:Oh yea, it's fantastic (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45006879)

no shit. there may be another layout but i don't know cuz i just hit the back arrow to get back here. why did i buy this big ass monitor? if i wanted to visit some stupid ass wordpress blog written by dipshits, designed by morons that's what i'd do!

Re:Oh yea, it's fantastic (5, Insightful)

aardvarkjoe (156801) | about a year ago | (#45006885)

On my 1920x1080 LCD, it looks retarded. There's as much whitespace running down the sides as there is content running down the middle.

It's even worse if you try to read the comments on a story. You know, the only reason why people actually come to slashdot rather than other websites with editors that actually make some effort. At 1920x1080, the comments take up a maximum of about 575 pixels -- less if they're nested. That means that more than 70% of the screen is wasted whitespace.

I have a large screen for a reason. If I want to read text in a narrow column, I'll resize the browser window.

can we turn off some of the crap ?? (2)

tibbar (30026) | about a year ago | (#45006669)

been reading here for 15 years or more ..
i like simple low bandwidth screens - aka text
your beta isn't ..

Re:can we turn off some of the crap ?? (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45006903)

Why all the big freaken pics ? Why have pics at all ? Waste of space, Waste of bandwidth, looks somewhat like FB and other fucked-up sites. Please no! Totally stupid design. Don't come to this site to see pictures, it's the content stupid ! no no no no please don't fuck-up Slashdot !!

Make it use full width (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45006671)

Wasting screen space, it's using about 1/2 my screen's width.

*PUKE* (3)

MetalliQaZ (539913) | about a year ago | (#45006673)

So Slashdot goes the way of Ars Technica. Simple readability gives way to stylish nonsense. Oh well, at least both have a way to tone it down and simulate the old format.

Another facebook (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45006679)

If I wanted to use Facebook, I would have signed up for it...

Sigh (5, Insightful)

koreanbabykilla (305807) | about a year ago | (#45006683)

Please! leave a way for people to use the old look forever. stayoffmylawn.slashdot.org or some such.

No. (1)

Programming_Wut (3237215) | about a year ago | (#45006685)

Nope. Not a fan.

oh no.. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45006689)

please no. i do not like

This reminds me of... (2)

dosh8er (608167) | about a year ago | (#45006697)

that "flat", pastel, square look. Like, Windows 8. Or new iOS. Heck, at least it's not Skeuomorphic... ... I admit, it is easier on the mobile.

Re:This reminds me of... (1)

bmxeroh (1694004) | about a year ago | (#45006917)

You deserve a mod. My first thought was "metro". Also do we really need huge pictures that have nothing to do with the story borrowed from Flikr? Here's a fun exercise, open up Yahoo in one tab, and the new beta in another.

Wasted Space (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45006709)

Can we please stop making columnar layouts that auto-margin? I am on an 11" screen and you're intentionally placing almost 3" of that into whitespace. Also, the photo headers are horrible.

Like others (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45006711)

Welcome to Engadget!
Welcome to the Verge


Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45006719)

Seriously. Boycott time.

Use the Space, Cowboy Neil (4, Insightful)

Lemmeoutada Collecti (588075) | about a year ago | (#45006723)

As a user of wide screens and larger fonts, I find the fixed width of the layout harder to read - I can only see a small list of one-two story summaries in the classic or new layout. Please do not follow the trend of making narrow center columns just to make space for pretty or advertisements on the sides.

Re:Use the Space, Cowboy Neil (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45006877)

As a user of wide screens and larger fonts, I find the fixed width of the layout harder to read .

As a user of multiple devices, I'm aware that it is NOT a fixed layout. Try again.

Meh (1)

Synesthes (1351729) | about a year ago | (#45006725)

Switch the frame layout to 'classic' and it doesn't look half bad. Still think the right hand column is too wide, personally.

The default view though? Not a fan.

Mobile fixes? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45006733)

Does it work better on mobile, or do I still get to choose between viewing absolutely everything posted or having half the up-modded posts be invisible? When I see redesigns happening while mobile is still a disaster, it's kind of annoying.

Sigh -- yet another crap 980 layout. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45006737)

I see a site optimized for tablets and 'mobile' while 'fuck the browser' unless you're an apple fan.

I also see forced fixed width that I will immediately turn off and disable all nearby advertisements while I'm editing my local styles.

Some of us actually have monitors with 1680 width (or more) that we use... to read. Quit forcing text to the width graphics artists think is perfect. Some of us use the web for its original purpose and leave our browsers *WIDE*.

I don't want to scroll further, scroll past ads, and have 30% of my width wasted for a reserve column for the entire screen. Oh look, lots of wasted padding I can do nothing with!

And I'm sure the good managerial staff at dice will say 'fuck it, make it shiny'.

The look (4, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45006739)

If you've ever wondered what it would look like if Scientific American got drunk and fucked Pinterest, today is your lucky day.

Headline font is too big (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45006743)

And content panel isnt wide enough. Basically not enough content per page

Wasn't broken; Didn't need fixing (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45006745)

Hey look! A redesign that no one asked for! Why must UI designers break everything that already works just to justify their jobs?

Can we please make it narrower? (5, Funny)

ClayJar (126217) | about a year ago | (#45006755)

I'm *so* tired of having slashdot use the entire width of my browser. I've been pining for expansive areas of whitespace for years!

Gonna miss Slashdot (-1)

frovingslosh (582462) | about a year ago | (#45006763)

Well, I looked at the new design, and my thought is that I'm going to miss Slashdot. Not only did I find it awful to look at, when I tried to click on the "we'd like your thoughts on it, too." link to let /. know, it tried to open Outlook, which I never use and will never use. Anyone who expects me to use Outlook is so out of touch that there seems no point in telling them not to fix something that isn't broken.

Re:Gonna miss Slashdot (1)

tuffy (10202) | about a year ago | (#45006929)

The "we'd like your thoughts" link is a standard mailto: URL. If it's using Outlook, that's because your browser is configured to use it.

I absolutely hate it. (2)

nospam007 (722110) | about a year ago | (#45006765)

Just did a 10 second look.

Found distorted photos, very wide text with no serifs helping you stay in line and the other 90% was white space waking me up.

Re:I absolutely hate it. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45006855)

Hate Hate Hate Hate it, too.

pluses and minuses (5, Informative)

Strange Ranger (454494) | about a year ago | (#45006779)

Well it certainly looks more modern and pretty.
But the part where 70% of my monitor is blank white space sure isn't a step forward.
And not being able to see any comment info on the home page is another step backwards.
But it doesn't look antiquated. That's sure a plus. It looks like the default wordpress theme.
Hey it's like a hot sorority chick! Sexy as hell for an hour. Then frustrating and mostly empty. But hey it shows real well at homecoming.

result on Ubuntu eee-pc900 (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45006799)

It's just as slow, and the layout makes me scroll up and down the whole time, to switch between text and images (with the +/- 500 pixel nett browser height)
Maybe I finally get around to setting up yet another news collection script, just to get the formatting to something bearable. (and I won't have time to parse adds, so add blocking will be called feature, not a bug.

Looks like all the content shovelware sites now (1)

rafial (4671) | about a year ago | (#45006803)

A slim column of text lost in a sea of ads. But that's okay, I rarely come to Slashdot any more, so I doubt I'll miss it.


Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45006807)

It's fucking terrible. The sidebar especially - I read this shit on a desktop, I have no tolerance for wasting space in mobilised designs.

Screen Size (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45006809)

Maybe if websites would stop making themselves only use half of the horizontal space, we could start getting larger resolutions on our monitors.

Awful (5, Insightful)

i_ate_god (899684) | about a year ago | (#45006813)

Why on earth did we spend all this money on beautiful 1920x1080 screens, AND spend so much time developing so called "responsive design" stylesheets and javascript, that we are still suck with extremely thin websites?

How on earth is this even remotely an improvement?

Be a first rate Slashdot, not a second rate other. (1)

atlauren (213357) | about a year ago | (#45006815)

Dislike. If I wanted to read TechHive, I would read TechHive. Slashdot became /. because only it was /. Be the best /. and don't try to be someone else.

Charlton Heston's ghost (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45006817)

You maniacs! You blew it up! Damn you! Damn you all to hell!

Ahem, excuse me.

I don't frequent slashdot anymore. Hell, I didn't even bother signing into my account to write this. But I do stop by occasionally, when I've exhausted the front page of reddit.

I'm a creature of habit. Are you really going to risk losing page views from people like me -- people who, I assume, are as plentiful and important as we are beautiful?

Pictures? (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45006819)

/. you're not Playboy, people genuinely only read you for the articles.

Some issues (1)

Medieval_Gnome (250212) | about a year ago | (#45006821)

In my first minute of using the site I found some issues.

On the home page, there's a popup that is half off my screen [imgur.com] . I tried resizing the browser, but it continued to be anchored to the side like that.

Once I clicked on this story, I was greeted with a story in two different fonts [imgur.com] (or at least different font sizes).

Wasted space (4, Informative)

Flentil (765056) | about a year ago | (#45006823)

I have a widescreen monitor and roughly half is blank white space. Also, the images load slow, like they wait for me to scroll and see they're not loaded and only then do they begin to load. I guess this is a feature, but it works like a bug. I'm with the others who say give us the option to see the old format, but the cynic in me says that will expire and we'll be stuck with the new view anyway in a few months.
Also, Slashdot, please remember what happened to Digg when they redesigned everything.

Bah? (4, Insightful)

denmarkw00t (892627) | about a year ago | (#45006829)

The threading isn't nearly as easy to spot so far, and I agree with others - why all the empty space?? It feels like it's a waste to at least not be able to choose a layout that really takes advantage of screen real-estate. Also, I don't see indicators for friends/foes...HOW DO I KNOW WHO I AGREE WITH!?!?

Use 100% width please (5, Informative)

Tepar (87925) | about a year ago | (#45006831)

This layout does not auto-adjust to the width of the browser. It is responsive for smaller screens, but for large ones, it wastes space. I hope you're also working on the comment filtering, because I don't see those controls anywhere.

unicode (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45006839)

Are we still using ASCII?

Ugh (5, Insightful)

sexconker (1179573) | about a year ago | (#45006841)

I am so fucking sick of the "image with rectangle overlay so we can put text on top of it" theme.

If your image isn't indicative of your content, it doesn't belong there. Get rid of the image and just use text for your headline.
If it is indicative of your content, don't cover up half of it with a semi-transparent rectangle with text and icons in it. Put the text above the image.

Furthermore, shoving multiple images together so that they actually adjoin when they represent separate content is retarded. Even if you want to adopt the "flat, sharp, "modern"" style (really, the Windows 8 "formerly-known-as-Metro" style), you should use the space you have.

I've got a 1280x1024 window for you to work with (minus scroll bars). This has been bog standard for a decade. There's no reason I should be looking at a filmstrip of content that's 600px wide and off center, with 3 adjoining images in a 560px wide square, each 50% covered by a white rectangle with text.

Furthermore, the bottom left image links to Story B but the bottom left semi-transparent rectangle links to nothing (it only the text links), and the bottom right image ALSO links to Story B, when it should link to Story C (the text for Image C does link to Story C).

all that shit on the right? (4, Interesting)

X0563511 (793323) | about a year ago | (#45006847)

Get rid of it. After a bit of scrolling it's wasted space (and it's still wasted space for lame content before you scroll)

designed for mobile? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45006857)

Is mobile delivery/readability the goal? I think it's kind of dumb that 2/3 of everyone's widescreen monitor space is wasted with the text squished in the middle.

Useless (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45006863)

- Slower. Why are upgrades virtually always slower?
- Burns screen real estate like there's no tomorrow. I must have missed the "upgrade to a 4K portrait monitor to read one and only summary" memo.
- Did I mention slow?
- Ineffective use of typeface and layout. Readability at an all time low. I suggest Slashdot drop user comments and call it a day.

Quite nice, but... (1)

torsmo (1301691) | about a year ago | (#45006871)

Can't post comments from elinks.

Slashdotted (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45006873)

already slashdotted :P

Never link to it on main post :)

Complete waste of space (4, Informative)

damnbunni (1215350) | about a year ago | (#45006875)

The actual content only fills about a third of my browser's width.


eeeeew (5, Insightful)

DOK2 (1354769) | about a year ago | (#45006881)

I just don't get this "hero" thing. I don't go to websites to see a gorgeous but meaningless photo. Slashdot is a conversation, not a photo scrapbook.

Well, a good start: first impression (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45006883)

Looks tablet-y, and glossy, and hipsteriffic. Pictures with everything, so I now have to do that much more work to find the headlines--which is what I'm after. So cool. Down to this pop-in whatever thingy that is only half visible, the other half falls outside the window.

You lot got yourself multiple superwidescreen monitors and always run browser windows maximised, don't you? Or is it just that you're nightly build junkies? How about some good old fashioned html4, instead of insisting on the latestest not-even-out-yet crap that's ment for mooltimeedia when you really ought to be focusing on textual content?

What's next, a flash everywhere? Moving pictures that start without my express permission?

Sod off, will ya.

Comments are hard to read (5, Insightful)

Alternate Interior (725192) | about a year ago | (#45006889)

They're not indented very far and that makes working out a comment's descendants take some work. Most of the value of slashdot compard to any other aggregation site is the discussion so I'm leary of any change which would lessen this sites commenting.

Now, just about any OTHER site in the world taking comments is a different story!

Why so narrow? (4, Informative)

Max_W (812974) | about a year ago | (#45006895)

Why did I buy a large wide display? 20 centimeters from the left and from the right are empty. A narrow long column of the text, like a pillar, is on the screen.

Terrible (4, Insightful)

Charliemopps (1157495) | about a year ago | (#45006897)

It's awful.
The right 1/3 of my screen is filled with polls and ads I don't care about
Scroll down past all those polls and adds and now that 1/3rd of my screen is just blank. wtf?
The headlines are in 30pt font and take up huge amounts of space like I had set windows to "I'm f#$@# blind!" mode.
Lots of white space (have you ever taken a webdesign course?)
Pop-up notifications that cover up the content until you are forced to make a choice? Really? Am I on yahoo or something here?
Under my account... again with 1/3rd of my screen taken up my nonsense. Now I have tokens? What?

Let us use the old layout (4, Funny)

Saethan (2725367) | about a year ago | (#45006899)

Wasted space, images I don't need plastered all over my screen when I have this up on my third monitor at work... Yeah, thanks slashdot. Had to check my calendar to make sure it wasn't April.

Some feedback (3, Informative)

jones_supa (887896) | about a year ago | (#45006901)

The main page looks refreshing and nice. Bringing more attention to submissions is also a good idea. Tree structure of comments is now harder to follow though. The classic version with clear borders around comments and ample usage of horizontal page was much more comfortable. I hope the main page autorefresh has been removed (or an option to turn it off), I always find it annoying in the current version. Now would also be excellent moment to roll in the long-awaited Unicode support.

Big images are useless (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45006909)

Each article has a GIANT image that is basically uninformative. Wow a picture of a bacteria and a huge explosion. This enhances my reading HOW? Part of the reason I love Slashdot is that it's mostly text. Also the title of articles is now in a HUGE font, and no longer separated from the main text by the background color. Put the subjects back in white-on-green and make them a reasonable font size please.

Lower information density, lower signal/noise, harder to figure out what div is supposed to be what (because they're all the same color). Please bring it back closer to the old style.

Dear assholes who make things fixed width... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45006913)

I have a wide monitor. I like to use it.

P.S. I fucking hate scrolling.

If you make this non-fluid shit the only option, you can kiss this pair of eyeballs goodbye.

Is not April 1st (1)

smoore (25406) | about a year ago | (#45006921)

April fools days in a few months away. Your supposed to hold stuff like this for then when we will appreciate it as a joke.

EVERY redesign has haters... (4, Interesting)

Slartibartfast (3395) | about a year ago | (#45006923)

But I really do think the pictures are too big. They get in the way of the page's continuity. I kinda like the small icons we have now. If you want other icons, or even images, that's cool -- but these are as big as the stories, themselves. Overkill, IMHO.

Fixed-width text areas are brain-dead. (5, Informative)

jcr (53032) | about a year ago | (#45006931)

When I make the window wider, I don't want to just get more blank space.

Seriously guys, this is pretty simple stuff. Get it right.


Content Width (3, Insightful)

AlreadyStarted (523251) | about a year ago | (#45006933)

Please let the content scale horizontally with the window size. It's so skinny as-is it's painful. And the always there top bar is incredibly annoying imo, just more javascript to lag.
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?