July 31, 2013 at 2:50 pm
Jack Corbett (7/31/2013)
I actually like the new icons. I think they are easier to read and more clearly show what they represent. There are only 2 wonky things I see:1. The image for the eBook listing is too different.
2. The Blog icon on the right column is not using the new format.
Other than those 2 minor things I think it's fine. At least in IE10.
My point isn't so much what I think of the "new look" (although I do admit that I don't like it). I'm just confused as to why someone would work so much on a new look when there's plenty of functionality that's been broken for years that could stand some attention.
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
July 31, 2013 at 3:21 pm
Jeff Moden (7/31/2013)
Jack Corbett (7/31/2013)
I actually like the new icons. I think they are easier to read and more clearly show what they represent. There are only 2 wonky things I see:1. The image for the eBook listing is too different.
2. The Blog icon on the right column is not using the new format.
Other than those 2 minor things I think it's fine. At least in IE10.
My point isn't so much what I think of the "new look" (although I do admit that I don't like it). I'm just confused as to why someone would work so much on a new look when there's plenty of functionality that's been broken for years that could stand some attention.
Hey, the developers (UI) and even some PM's and upper management where I work are more concerned with the look than the functionality of our software. I've been at this company for 19-20 months and the entire time I've been trying to get functionality put ahead of look to no avail.
Jack Corbett
Consultant - Straight Path Solutions
Check out these links on how to get faster and more accurate answers:
Forum Etiquette: How to post data/code on a forum to get the best help
Need an Answer? Actually, No ... You Need a Question
July 31, 2013 at 6:42 pm
Jeff Moden (7/31/2013)
Steve Jones - SSC Editor (7/31/2013)
That being said, the icons shouldn't have been rolled out without site design changes.Heh... I guess there's no use in responding to anymore "New Look" posts. As a very wise man once said, "It is what it is". 😛
Any chance of the Developers spending a little time fixing some of the things I mentioned on the "New Look" thread?
I'm drafting a few items to debate/discuss with the community. No changes, including the ugly icons, until I can get something out and debate it. I hope to have something tomorrow in a thread, and probably some notes in the newsletter across the next week with design ideas, images, thoughts, and requests for comment.
In terms of your requests, some of those were mine as well. Unfortunately I had a developer give notice a month or do ago, going down to 2 days/wk and leaving this week. We have a second dev, but less experienced, and so some of the more complex stuff WRT these forums, are likely off limits in the short term. We thought we had a new hire, but it fell through. (hint, if you know a good ASP.NET/C# dev that wants work, we need one or more. UK preferred, other places considered).
As of now, most of the last year has been spent on Simple Talk, which had a very creaky, and cumbersome platform. This one, whilst it has annoyances, is stable and works well. I'm lobbying to change that and move forward. The design changes were a first cut since I (finally) got some UX/Design time and many of these changes were CSS type stuff that didn't require a dev. The Google Reader cutoff impacted us and we lost some dev time to finding an alternative for this. I am hoping we can prove the SSC is worth more investment in terms of change. I meet with the CTO in a few weeks in NYC and am trying to find ways to create value for RG with changes to the site. The Stairways were a major change last year, and we have a few minor things in Q related to those (article series), but there's lots more.
In terms of forum fixes, some of these are fairly substantial in terms of impact to the architecture and it becomes hard to replace part A, without then fixing Part B, or enhancing Part C. that's the downside of this forum technology, which is essentially unchanged since andy Warren and I picked it in 2001. The vendor has been less than excited about enhancing it as well, so we have modified it in places, but it's a bit of a mess.
July 31, 2013 at 6:55 pm
Steve Jones - SSC Editor (7/31/2013)
Jeff Moden (7/31/2013)
Steve Jones - SSC Editor (7/31/2013)
That being said, the icons shouldn't have been rolled out without site design changes.Heh... I guess there's no use in responding to anymore "New Look" posts. As a very wise man once said, "It is what it is". 😛
Any chance of the Developers spending a little time fixing some of the things I mentioned on the "New Look" thread?
I'm drafting a few items to debate/discuss with the community. No changes, including the ugly icons, until I can get something out and debate it. I hope to have something tomorrow in a thread, and probably some notes in the newsletter across the next week with design ideas, images, thoughts, and requests for comment.
In terms of your requests, some of those were mine as well. Unfortunately I had a developer give notice a month or do ago, going down to 2 days/wk and leaving this week. We have a second dev, but less experienced, and so some of the more complex stuff WRT these forums, are likely off limits in the short term. We thought we had a new hire, but it fell through. (hint, if you know a good ASP.NET/C# dev that wants work, we need one or more. UK preferred, other places considered).
As of now, most of the last year has been spent on Simple Talk, which had a very creaky, and cumbersome platform. This one, whilst it has annoyances, is stable and works well. I'm lobbying to change that and move forward. The design changes were a first cut since I (finally) got some UX/Design time and many of these changes were CSS type stuff that didn't require a dev. The Google Reader cutoff impacted us and we lost some dev time to finding an alternative for this. I am hoping we can prove the SSC is worth more investment in terms of change. I meet with the CTO in a few weeks in NYC and am trying to find ways to create value for RG with changes to the site. The Stairways were a major change last year, and we have a few minor things in Q related to those (article series), but there's lots more.
In terms of forum fixes, some of these are fairly substantial in terms of impact to the architecture and it becomes hard to replace part A, without then fixing Part B, or enhancing Part C. that's the downside of this forum technology, which is essentially unchanged since andy Warren and I picked it in 2001. The vendor has been less than excited about enhancing it as well, so we have modified it in places, but it's a bit of a mess.
Steve, I would recommend that for the review you direct the developers to consider emotional impact of colors.
They (the developers) would be, IMNERHO, well advised to follow if not Microsoft's guidelines, then at least UX studies because the majority of visitors to this site are Microsoft users and after years of daily usage (indoctrination?) they consider Microsoft's metaphors "the natural way to express this." (Just like the guys from SF's press take anything that Apple does as "natural" because they have used Macs for the last almost 30 years.)
July 31, 2013 at 8:53 pm
Jack Corbett (7/31/2013)
Jeff Moden (7/31/2013)
Jack Corbett (7/31/2013)
I actually like the new icons. I think they are easier to read and more clearly show what they represent. There are only 2 wonky things I see:1. The image for the eBook listing is too different.
2. The Blog icon on the right column is not using the new format.
Other than those 2 minor things I think it's fine. At least in IE10.
My point isn't so much what I think of the "new look" (although I do admit that I don't like it). I'm just confused as to why someone would work so much on a new look when there's plenty of functionality that's been broken for years that could stand some attention.
Hey, the developers (UI) and even some PM's and upper management where I work are more concerned with the look than the functionality of our software. I've been at this company for 19-20 months and the entire time I've been trying to get functionality put ahead of look to no avail.
Heh... misery loves company so I definitely have an appreciation for that. I can't help you convince your management that changing the box doesn't fix the broken crackers inside, but I can try with SSC. 😀
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
July 31, 2013 at 8:58 pm
Steve Jones - SSC Editor (7/31/2013)
Jeff Moden (7/31/2013)
Steve Jones - SSC Editor (7/31/2013)
That being said, the icons shouldn't have been rolled out without site design changes.Heh... I guess there's no use in responding to anymore "New Look" posts. As a very wise man once said, "It is what it is". 😛
Any chance of the Developers spending a little time fixing some of the things I mentioned on the "New Look" thread?
I'm drafting a few items to debate/discuss with the community. No changes, including the ugly icons, until I can get something out and debate it. I hope to have something tomorrow in a thread, and probably some notes in the newsletter across the next week with design ideas, images, thoughts, and requests for comment.
In terms of your requests, some of those were mine as well. Unfortunately I had a developer give notice a month or do ago, going down to 2 days/wk and leaving this week. We have a second dev, but less experienced, and so some of the more complex stuff WRT these forums, are likely off limits in the short term. We thought we had a new hire, but it fell through. (hint, if you know a good ASP.NET/C# dev that wants work, we need one or more. UK preferred, other places considered).
As of now, most of the last year has been spent on Simple Talk, which had a very creaky, and cumbersome platform. This one, whilst it has annoyances, is stable and works well. I'm lobbying to change that and move forward. The design changes were a first cut since I (finally) got some UX/Design time and many of these changes were CSS type stuff that didn't require a dev. The Google Reader cutoff impacted us and we lost some dev time to finding an alternative for this. I am hoping we can prove the SSC is worth more investment in terms of change. I meet with the CTO in a few weeks in NYC and am trying to find ways to create value for RG with changes to the site. The Stairways were a major change last year, and we have a few minor things in Q related to those (article series), but there's lots more.
In terms of forum fixes, some of these are fairly substantial in terms of impact to the architecture and it becomes hard to replace part A, without then fixing Part B, or enhancing Part C. that's the downside of this forum technology, which is essentially unchanged since andy Warren and I picked it in 2001. The vendor has been less than excited about enhancing it as well, so we have modified it in places, but it's a bit of a mess.
Thanks, Steve. I appreciate the time you took explaining all of that. SSC is "home away from home" and with some of the tweaks you and I have talked about recently and in the past, it could be a palace. 😀
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
August 1, 2013 at 1:04 am
Jack Corbett (7/31/2013)
Jeff Moden (7/31/2013)
...as to why someone would work so much on a new look when there's plenty of functionality that's been broken...... I've been trying to get functionality put ahead of look to no avail.
Eons ago I was shopping with my first girlfriend for a second hand car. We were walking down the Automile when we came across one dealership with a little lane out back. Parked in the lane were three completely unrelated makes and models of car...all the exact, same, identical newly sprayed colour.
We didn't buy there and walked on. Image over functionality.
Fal.
August 1, 2013 at 5:43 am
Steve Jones - SSC Editor (7/31/2013)
As of now, most of the last year has been spent on Simple Talk, which had a very creaky, and cumbersome platform. This one, whilst it has annoyances, is stable and works well. I'm lobbying to change that and move forward.
So wait, you're *trying* to make SSC more creaky and cumbersome?
I'm so confused...
:-D;-):hehe:
August 1, 2013 at 10:20 am
jasona.work (8/1/2013)
Steve Jones - SSC Editor (7/31/2013)
As of now, most of the last year has been spent on Simple Talk, which had a very creaky, and cumbersome platform. This one, whilst it has annoyances, is stable and works well. I'm lobbying to change that and move forward.So wait, you're *trying* to make SSC more creaky and cumbersome?
I'm so confused...
:-D;-):hehe:
My apologies for the ambiguous pronoun. :w00t:
I am hoping to make this platform more interesting, which means more change. I'm sure that will bother some of you, but overall we are hoping to get things working smoother. Lots of rough edges on what we have, even though it performs and works well.
ST was a nightmare to change anything, even to do basic administration (which is really, really easy here). They got most of the developer time over the last year. Here we had very minor changes, small bug fixes, and a few default fixes to make things easier for me.
August 1, 2013 at 10:29 am
Steve Jones - SSC Editor (8/1/2013)
jasona.work (8/1/2013)
Steve Jones - SSC Editor (7/31/2013)
As of now, most of the last year has been spent on Simple Talk, which had a very creaky, and cumbersome platform. This one, whilst it has annoyances, is stable and works well. I'm lobbying to change that and move forward.So wait, you're *trying* to make SSC more creaky and cumbersome?
I'm so confused...
:-D;-):hehe:
My apologies for the ambiguous pronoun. :w00t:
I am hoping to make this platform more interesting, which means more change. I'm sure that will bother some of you, but overall we are hoping to get things working smoother. Lots of rough edges on what we have, even though it performs and works well.
ST was a nightmare to change anything, even to do basic administration (which is really, really easy here). They got most of the developer time over the last year. Here we had very minor changes, small bug fixes, and a few default fixes to make things easier for me.
If you need help with QA - another pair of eyes -, I will volunteer.
August 1, 2013 at 9:05 pm
Steve Jones - SSC Editor (8/1/2013)
jasona.work (8/1/2013)
Steve Jones - SSC Editor (7/31/2013)
As of now, most of the last year has been spent on Simple Talk, which had a very creaky, and cumbersome platform. This one, whilst it has annoyances, is stable and works well. I'm lobbying to change that and move forward.So wait, you're *trying* to make SSC more creaky and cumbersome?
I'm so confused...
:-D;-):hehe:
My apologies for the ambiguous pronoun. :w00t:
I am hoping to make this platform more interesting, which means more change. I'm sure that will bother some of you, but overall we are hoping to get things working smoother. Lots of rough edges on what we have, even though it performs and works well.
ST was a nightmare to change anything, even to do basic administration (which is really, really easy here). They got most of the developer time over the last year. Here we had very minor changes, small bug fixes, and a few default fixes to make things easier for me.
"Change" is not a "problem" that I'm personally bothered by... unless the change isn't actually an improvement or, worse yet, is actually worse than the original. 😉
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
August 2, 2013 at 5:40 am
How many people (besides Jeff and myself) have written SQL Spackle articles?
How many SQL Spackle articles are there?
Yes, I have a reason for asking. But I want to share it with the Spackle authors first before I say anything else.
August 2, 2013 at 6:35 am
Brandie Tarvin (8/2/2013)
How many people (besides Jeff and myself) have written SQL Spackle articles?
Not me, my preference is deeper technical articles (when I write at all these days)
Gail Shaw
Microsoft Certified Master: SQL Server, MVP, M.Sc (Comp Sci)
SQL In The Wild: Discussions on DB performance with occasional diversions into recoverability
August 2, 2013 at 10:04 am
Brandie Tarvin (8/2/2013)
How many people (besides Jeff and myself) have written SQL Spackle articles?How many SQL Spackle articles are there?
Yes, I have a reason for asking. But I want to share it with the Spackle authors first before I say anything else.
Wayne has a couple out there. Not sure on the total. I have 1 in progress currently.
Jason...AKA CirqueDeSQLeil
_______________________________________________
I have given a name to my pain...MCM SQL Server, MVP
SQL RNNR
Posting Performance Based Questions - Gail Shaw[/url]
Learn Extended Events
August 2, 2013 at 11:01 am
SQLRNNR (8/2/2013)
Brandie Tarvin (8/2/2013)
How many people (besides Jeff and myself) have written SQL Spackle articles?How many SQL Spackle articles are there?
Yes, I have a reason for asking. But I want to share it with the Spackle authors first before I say anything else.
Wayne has a couple out there. Not sure on the total. I have 1 in progress currently.
those 3, Dwain Camps, perhaps one or two more.
Viewing 15 posts - 40,741 through 40,755 (of 66,738 total)
You must be logged in to reply to this topic. Login to reply