New look

[Denny Crane]

One of our staff members, Chingy0007, has been working hard on new banners for the top of the pages on the site.

In order to facilitate fixed width banners like these, the site has to be rendered at fixed width instead of fluid width. That is, you'll see the WWW page content centered in your browser with dark red on the left/right.

The width chosen is 960 pixels, which is suitable for people with 1024x768 screens. This is a common denominator kind of thing - if we make it wider, then people with laptops will have to scroll around to read posts, which would be a pain for them.

Anyhow, let us know what you think.

EDIT:

Blazers forum is currently 1136 wide to support 1200 wide browsers.

 

[Master Shake]

I really like it.

 

[MadeFromDust]

Normally I'm against people tampering with stuff like this (if it ain't broke, don't fix it), but I'm really liking this so far. Good work.

 

[blue32]

I like it.
/thumbsup

 

[maxiep]

Good stuff. So when you post a picture that's too wide, will the picture adjust its size to fit in the new width?

 

[Denny Crane]

I think wide pictures are going to jack the thread display wider.

 

[illmatic99]

I don't like it.

The avatar takes up like a fifth of the post area, and I have considering the fact that I have a widescreen monitor, there's way too much empty space on either side of the actual post.

What was wrong with the old version?

 

[Master Shake]

I didn't like how wide it was before and the team colors on the side are nice.

 

[Colonel Ronan]

Really nice.

 

[Foulzilla]

I have to agree with yuyuza1. I dislike the wasted space on the sides. That being said, the new banner does look nice.

 

[The_Lillard_King]

If this is a poll . . . I like the old format because the new format has too much empty screen space (I'm a widescreen user).

But I like the banner on top and appreciate the effort . . .either format works for me.

 

[DennisRodman]

1024x768 seems archaic these days.

 

[Denny Crane]

I don't like it.

The avatar takes up like a fifth of the post area, and I have considering the fact that I have a widescreen monitor, there's way too much empty space on either side of the actual post.

What was wrong with the old version?

Your criticisms are valid.

I've always been a fan of fluid width (fills the browser, no matter the size) design. The drawback is that you can't easily do fixed width banners like the one at the top of the page, nor can you really do any sorts of true page layout. The latter is not so important, IMO.

Fixed width banners allow a lot of room for creativity on the graphic designers' parts. For everyone, it's WYSIWYG.

For people browsing the site, there are a lot of modern considerations. For example, I browse the site a lot from a blackberry, and it's not all that great an experience. People will be using netbooks and other smaller devices as time goes on.

I am open to scrapping the new design as much as I am to working with it and making it as great as possible.

One thing that I'd consider is going to a 1200 pixel wide format (it's 1024 wide now). People (like me) in the professional WWW world have watched fixed width designs go from 640 wide in the old days to 800 wide to 1024 wide. The driving factor is analysis of the screen sizes used by visitors to the site (and all sites everywhere). We get data like 12% use IE 6, 17% have 1200 wide screens, etc. These days, 1024 is the recommended size to suit the most people.

On the other hand, if 17% have 1024 wide and the other 83% have wider, then the tradeoff to 1200 might be worthwhile and bleeding edge.

 

[MAS RipCity]

it screwed up my sig..ugh..banner looks cool tho

 

[ABM]

For those that want a bigger view, if possible, simply depress your Control key use the scroll wheel on your mouse to enlarge/shrink the overall page.

 

[Denny Crane]

I've just adjusted the width to 1136 (for 1200 pixel screens) and put up a 1136 wide banner.

Is this better?

 

[THE HCP]

I like it!

 

[Denny Crane]

You can compare with the narrower width in the Cavs' forum:

http://sportstwo.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=93

 

[Miksaid]

I actually preferred the narrower width that it was set at a few seconds ago. The empty space gave me the impression of a cleaner looking site, but that's just me.

 

[MrSelfDestruct]

I like the new, wider format. It allows for a bit more text on each line, which will in turn lead to a bit less scrolling.

Nice work.

 

[Minstrel]

I prefer the narrower width, actually. Sometimes I want to keep my browser narrower, to see other windows. And even when I don't, the white space on each side gives it a clean, trim look, I agree with Miksaid on that.

 

[Denny Crane]

I think a poll is in order.

Or maybe I'll figure out a way to let people choose a width. It would mean having 2 or more banners per team/page, but that probably won't be that big a deal.

 

[Minstrel]

Or maybe I'll figure out a way to let people choose a width. It would mean having 2 or more banners per team/page, but that probably won't be that big a deal.

That would be a great solution, if it isn't too much work.

 

[Denny Crane]

That would be a great solution, if it isn't too much work.

Looking at it now, and I don't think it's a lot of work at all, actually.

The bigger deal is that what I do for one forum is multiplied by the number of forums I have to apply the changes to.

 

[Ed O]

I like the wider version, also, but agree that having the option for either would be good.

I SUSPECT that there are going to be a few people with smaller resolutions that would have troubles getting the wider version on the screen.

Ed O.

 

[number 10]

I'm still using 1024x768, so obviously I'm not really feeling the new widescreen style.
The banner looks great, though.

 

[LOTBfan]

I feel sorry for people with small resolutions, they probably get laughted at by their friends in the sauna, and likely have a hard time getting second dates with the ladies.

Looks great on 1280X1024, little weird at 1600X1200, but i can make it work

 

[Denny Crane]

Pardon me while I screw up the site for a few minutes implementing this checkbox to toggle the width.

 

[Natebishop3]

I dig it.... it looks great on my monitor. Although, the colors look like a very deep maroon to me.

 

[MrSelfDestruct]

I dig it.... it looks great on my monitor. Although, the colors look like a very deep maroon to me.

Same. In fact, from most angles the sides look black. It may just be my settings though.