Niners Nation New Layout
by Fooch on Nov 3, 2009 10:14 AM PST
66 comments
Alright folks, as many of you have noticed, we've got a new layout here at Niners Nation. Change can always be a bit weird and I'm sure some folks will dislike the new look more than others.
Nonetheless, given the changes I'm curious what folks think about the new look at Niners Nation. I'd like to hear both the good AND the bad about site. The tech folks are always looking for feedback so I definitely would like to do what I can to provide them with appropriate feedback. So have at it. No need to hold back on account of hurting anybody's feelings. If you feel strongly about certain aspects of the re-design, please be as specific as possible about something you like or don't like.
This is a FanPost and does not necessarily reflect the views of Niners Nation's writers or editors. It does reflect the views of this particular fan though, which is as important as the views of Niners Nation's writers or editors.
1 recs |
66 comments
| Add comment
Email
Print
Comments
As I mentioned in the other thread...
It’s definitely cleaner looking. However, all the red text and all the various boxes (i.e. advertisements and section boxes) stand out more and actually make it look quite cluttered. The title not being bold, but the by-lines and timestamps being so is a little odd on the eyes. It’s almost like the by-line and timestamp are the more important parts of the post, rather than the title and the body.
Basically, the color scheme makes it look cleaner, but all the content on the page makes it seem cluttered (maybe the “cleanliness” of the colors is revealing more of the clutter that’s always been there).
by sfgfan on Nov 3, 2009 10:28 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
Looks more clean.
It’ll just grow on me.
by thecity23 on Nov 3, 2009 10:32 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
Not that I don't like it but the border seems to be awkward
I cold care less I’m gonna post my niner lovin a%% off
"Optimist Prime"
"Child Please" -Ochocinco
by rlott#42 on Nov 3, 2009 10:32 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
Couldn’t care less.
Cold care less is nonsense.
Context, people. More context is good. Less context is bad. If you're willing to be reductive, then you're willing to be wrong.
by howtheyscored on Nov 3, 2009 10:49 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Mispell.............sorries!!
"Optimist Prime"
"Child Please" -Ochocinco
by rlott#42 on Nov 3, 2009 11:05 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I would have said the same thing if you’d spelled “could” correctly, though.
Context, people. More context is good. Less context is bad. If you're willing to be reductive, then you're willing to be wrong.
by howtheyscored on Nov 3, 2009 11:10 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Why do Americans say "could care less"?
I have never got that. If you could care less about something, that surely means the thing you are describing has more resonance with you than some other things, which is contrary to what you mean. Couldn’t care less is definitely better. And I’m a US-phile by the way, I think US expressions are better across the board … apart from that one. So it’s not like I’m being an English imperialist. Don’t shoot me with a musket.
"This could be another Very Special Team" ... Superbowl winning Niners lineman Dan Audick ...
by LondonNiner on Nov 4, 2009 9:11 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Is it a US thing? I thought it was just a ridiculous thing.
Oh… don’t get me started….
If you start me up, baby, well I’ll never stop.
Context, people. More context is good. Less context is bad. If you're willing to be reductive, then you're willing to be wrong.
by howtheyscored on Nov 4, 2009 9:16 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Yep, sorry to say that it is a US thing.
I do not judge you. ;)
"This could be another Very Special Team" ... Superbowl winning Niners lineman Dan Audick ...
by LondonNiner on Nov 4, 2009 10:18 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
That's the problem
You are grading Americans on their understanding of English. Just file it under the lost cause folder.
by bignerd on Nov 4, 2009 11:19 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
To be completely fair to both nations ...
… most people are stupid, wherever they come from. I work in the newsroom of one of the most respected media organisations in the world and I know people who do not know the difference between its and it’s.
"This could be another Very Special Team" ... Superbowl winning Niners lineman Dan Audick ...
by LondonNiner on Nov 4, 2009 12:26 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Don't shoot me with a musket
…okay so that was pretty darn funny.
by jfainsf49 on Nov 4, 2009 3:14 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Hey. I'm an American and I say "couldn't care less!"
On another note, I think the new look is much like the Forty Niners’ old uniforms. An eyesore. When the site had fully been loaded, I thought it was still loading…awkward indeed. The gray and white give the site an old-ish look much like hair color.
I know I’m being very critical with my comments, but I don’t really care. It’s not like this’ll stop me from posting. It just wouldn’t hurt to have a good-looking site as well!
Natural hater of all NY, Pittsburgh, Oakland, LA, and Dallas teams
by SSC24 on Nov 4, 2009 10:11 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I don't like it
Mainly because the Articles Titles are centred anymore, and if they never were centred, then there’s certainly something different about them I don’t like.
I don’t like where some things moved from the right side of the page to the left side of the page. And I don’t notice it being any “slicker” than it was before.
It kinda seems like it went back a step in design, and not forward. It’s not terrible enough for me to stop coming to the site and maybe I’m just too stubborn when it comes to change in things that are familiar.
by Andrew Davidson on Nov 3, 2009 10:33 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
Re: stepping backwards in design
I think SBNation is going with less color to kind of push them toward that more “professional” look of traditional news sites. Of course, news sites now a days are overrun by Java apps and all that ridiculous unnecessary stuff, so I definitely think SBN is cleaner than traditional news sites.
by sfgfan on Nov 3, 2009 10:49 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
overrun by Java apps and all that ridiculous unnecessary stuff
I completely agree, and I felt SBN was already cleaner than traditional “news” sites. Something about it just feels off. For the most part, I think for me, it’s the story headers not being centre format. Makes the page look wrong, like my browser is malfunctioning. I’m sure I’ll get used to it, but I certainly prefer the centre format of a header.
by Andrew Davidson on Nov 3, 2009 12:43 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
YES!!! SO THAT'S IT!!!
The article titles aren’t centered. I knew something was wrong with that…Looked weird.
Natural hater of all NY, Pittsburgh, Oakland, LA, and Dallas teams
by SSC24 on Nov 4, 2009 10:12 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Text is weird
I think the text in the titles and the story are way too different. Obviously the title should be bigger than the story, but it’s too big I think.
by brundylop on Nov 3, 2009 10:44 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
There should be an option for “i really could care less.” As long as its functional and I can read everything, I’m happy.
Sometimes the impossible can become possible if you're AWESOME!
by ZeroIndulgence on Nov 3, 2009 10:44 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
That option would be nonsense.
Context, people. More context is good. Less context is bad. If you're willing to be reductive, then you're willing to be wrong.
by howtheyscored on Nov 3, 2009 10:50 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I don’t understand why this mistake is so common. It’s like… 99% of people get this wrong. It’s plain English! It’s not even tricky. It’s like, if you understand VERBS then you can tell why “could care less” is wrong and “could not care less” is right. Perfectly intelligent, well-spoken people get this wrong. I don’t understand it! I don’t. I really don’t. It’s not even colloquial. It’s just nonsense. Pure, unfettered nonsense. Why!?
Context, people. More context is good. Less context is bad. If you're willing to be reductive, then you're willing to be wrong.
by howtheyscored on Nov 3, 2009 10:53 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
It’s not even a double negative! It’s a regular negative! Gah!
Context, people. More context is good. Less context is bad. If you're willing to be reductive, then you're willing to be wrong.
by howtheyscored on Nov 3, 2009 10:55 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Woa
Slow down………spaz much?
"Optimist Prime"
"Child Please" -Ochocinco
by rlott#42 on Nov 3, 2009 11:07 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I just find it flabbergasting.
Context, people. More context is good. Less context is bad. If you're willing to be reductive, then you're willing to be wrong.
by howtheyscored on Nov 3, 2009 11:09 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I mean, think about it.
Say there is a scale of 0 – 10 for how much I care about something. Not caring about something at all would be 0. Completely caring for something would be 10.
If my level of care is ANYWHERE in the 1 – 10 range, then I COULD care less about it. Saying that I COULD care less about something doesn’t tell you anything about how I feel about it. For all you know, when I say that I could care less about something, it means that I completely care about it in every way. Because if I completely care about it in every way, then there is a lot of room for me to be doing less caring.
However, if my level of care is at 0, then I could not possibly care less about it. You can not go lower than 0.
It’s an unbelievably basic thing. It’s not even reading comprehension. It’s barely even language comprehension. The amount of thought that it takes to realize the difference between these two phrases should be so small as to be unmeasurable by modern means. And yet millions of people put even LESS thought into it when they say it wrong 19 times every day.
Context, people. More context is good. Less context is bad. If you're willing to be reductive, then you're willing to be wrong.
by howtheyscored on Nov 3, 2009 11:23 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
you know what Howie
I could care less what you think about this!
A hearty thank you to Rich Aurilia for all the good memories, and to the Niners for finally getting the uni's (mostly) right.
by wjackalope on Nov 3, 2009 11:36 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Me too.
Context, people. More context is good. Less context is bad. If you're willing to be reductive, then you're willing to be wrong.
by howtheyscored on Nov 3, 2009 11:41 AM PST up reply actions 1 recs
Brilliant touche, howtheyscored
You COULD care less about wjackalope not caring less. This is a fantastic debate ;) I would have posted my support of you, howtheyscored, here, instead of above, had I realised the debate was continuing.
"This could be another Very Special Team" ... Superbowl winning Niners lineman Dan Audick ...
by LondonNiner on Nov 4, 2009 9:15 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
It's a stupid expression
No defense for it, really.
"The questions are so stupid. I don't believe in rivalries. I don't believe in curses. Wake up the damn Bambino, maybe I'll drill him in the ass."
- Pedro Martinez, asked about the Curse of the Bambino
by achiappanza on Nov 4, 2009 5:45 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Notably:
Merriam-Webster defines “spaz” as “one who is inept” (alternately, a klutz).
Which is kind of weird considering it cites the etymology back to “spastic” which has nothing to do with either ineptitude or klutziness.
However, in this context, where spaz denotes ineptitude, I’m actually not spazzing much. In fact, I’m displaying a notable lack of spaz with regard this particular phrase.
Context, people. More context is good. Less context is bad. If you're willing to be reductive, then you're willing to be wrong.
by howtheyscored on Nov 3, 2009 11:45 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
if you understand VERBS then you can tell why "could care less" is wrong and "could not care less" is right.
Thank you Howie, for years I thought I was the only one anal enough to really be bothered by the incorrect term of “could care less”. However, saying you “could” care less means you don’t care enough to care less. For the most part I’m with you, and have generally said “couldn’t care less” for many years.
by Andrew Davidson on Nov 3, 2009 12:45 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
You really could?
So it’s not as bad as you couldn’t care less, right?
by sfgfan on Nov 3, 2009 10:50 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
meh
I don’t think it is better than the old format, just different. It won’t stop me from coming here.
by bakoninerfan on Nov 3, 2009 10:46 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
Seems like the change was made to cut out a few graphics and save bandwidth. The articles and comment sections look much better but the header looks awful (like the webmaster is still working on the website or HTML error) and column division needs to be more pronounced.
by bignerd on Nov 3, 2009 10:54 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
the tabs at the top (home, fanposts, fanshots, etc) look like garbage
they were a lot better before.
A hearty thank you to Rich Aurilia for all the good memories, and to the Niners for finally getting the uni's (mostly) right.
by wjackalope on Nov 3, 2009 11:06 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
also, what happened to Barack Obama for people with no avatar?
a star? lame
A hearty thank you to Rich Aurilia for all the good memories, and to the Niners for finally getting the uni's (mostly) right.
by wjackalope on Nov 3, 2009 11:07 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
Yeah replacing the generic Obama avatar with the communist star is freakin priceless
by jfainsf49 on Nov 3, 2009 3:52 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Communist Star
I thought the communist symbol was the sickle and hammer?
by bignerd on Nov 3, 2009 4:24 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
lighten up there Castro we are both right
and furthermore, I will lay off the politics starting now.
by jfainsf49 on Nov 4, 2009 12:03 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Not sure about it Fooch
I first thought my computer was going haywire! Now that I found this post, I see that you all did change the layout on the site. I think its the Home page that bothers me. it just seems a bit more cluttered.. The Headline posts doesn’t seem to grab you and draw you into the stories now. I am not against trying to make improvements and I am use to change seeing I’ve been in the Military for over 20 years now, So, I will wait and see what I think about it at the end of the week. Maybe I will change my mind. But keep up the good work!
11-5... My 49ers pre-season prediction!
by Ten-Man on Nov 3, 2009 11:20 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
I really, really, really don't like it
It looks amateurish and washed out, I like the coloration of the old one, bring it back!!
by foosball4949 on Nov 3, 2009 11:35 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
Hm.. just a few obsevations
1. The headlines are not centered, I know this is intentional but I think it looks very amateur.
2. The headlines do not distinguish themselves, the text needs to be bigger, and if not bigger at the very least bolder.
3. Poster’s name and time underneath headlines needs to be smaller and bolder, it looks very unprofessional to me. It needs to be smaller than the text of the body.
To me, point numbers two and three are completely detrimental to my viewing of the site. I feel if I came across Niners Nation randomly and was looking for a home as far as news and community goes, I might just give it a pass based solely on points two and three. I understand that is a rather shallow observation, but how a site looks is always the first thing that comes to mind.
One last thing is all the text on the front page, the text bodies and what not.. it either all looks bigger, or it looks.. plainer. It just looks plain, possibly due to size. I think all posting information, headlines and text body should be different sizes.
You can never resist the game... nor could I... we're the same, so don't even try.
by Ninjames on Nov 3, 2009 11:48 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
Would not stay, that is..
due to my initial reaction of being unprofessional and amateur.
You can never resist the game... nor could I... we're the same, so don't even try.
by Ninjames on Nov 3, 2009 11:49 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Shallow reactions rule the Internet. If people perceive the design as needing work, than they just assume the content also needs work and quickly move on without poking around.
by bignerd on Nov 3, 2009 12:51 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I don't mind it
parts of it look good and a few things are going to take some time to adjust to, but overall not bad.
"Pat is still just scratching the surface." - Coach Singletary on LB Patrick Willis
by 49erLou on Nov 3, 2009 12:17 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
I dig it
Much cleaner to me. I do wish there was a black bg option tho…
by RobbieS on Nov 3, 2009 1:08 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
Its good
I’m not sure exactly what changed but I noticed something changed and looks a bit better.
The only thing about the layout that sometimes freaks me out is when I’m scrolling through the Fanposts and other news on the right side, sometimes there’s a related article or other type of post that says PLACED on IR, or SERIOUSLY INJURED or something along those lines with some players names, so as I’m reading I think OMG what now? Then slowly continue reading and realize it’s a 1 month or several month old article about something and nothing recent, but sometimes some words jump out at you from the post titles.
by fortyniners on Nov 3, 2009 7:02 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
Having got (gotten?) distracted in the syntax row above ...
… I shall now revert to the question in hand. Do I like the refresh of this website? Yes, it’s better. I work in the industry, and NOBODY likes new websites. If you come back to a site day after day, that means you like it, and folks don’t like it to change. But this layout is better, and everyone will get used to it. The only two things you might say are that a blog in advance to warn us would have been a nice touch, and secondly, it would be good to know what editorial changes are coming. Design changes and style sheets, or whatever this is, are fine, but actual improvements to the content would be even better. Not that this site needs many improvements. It’s brilliantly run by Fooch with a fantastic community.
"This could be another Very Special Team" ... Superbowl winning Niners lineman Dan Audick ...
by LondonNiner on Nov 4, 2009 9:24 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
Improvements to the content? Editorial changes?
Can you clarify what you mean by that?
Also, definitely my fault for not putting up a warning that SB Nation was changing things up. Just slipped my mind.
by Fooch on Nov 4, 2009 9:47 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Fooch - the stuff I flagged to you the other day?
About links to Twitter and YouTube and others? You thanked me and said you’d have a think about it after your busy week? I think we had that conversation in the Nuggets one day?
"This could be another Very Special Team" ... Superbowl winning Niners lineman Dan Audick ...
by LondonNiner on Nov 4, 2009 10:17 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
oh yea
Sorry about that.
I am in fact working on that. I thought you meant when we added some new folks as front page writers.
by Fooch on Nov 4, 2009 10:20 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
No worries Fooch ...
…. I felt a bit presumptuous suggesting anything at all. You had a fantastic site before I came along and don’t need me to make suggestions I am sure.
But if you liked those thoughts, that’s cool and I’ll help you if you want. Like I mentioned before, I have set up a Twitter ‘list’ for the 49ers and I’m confident it has every Niner Tweeter – players, media, whatever. I could post it, and then people could use it? I’d be revealing my real name, but this isn’t Reservoir Dogs right? Nobody is going to shoot me if I reveal my true identity?
But might be better anyway for your Niners Nation Twitter account to set up a list, then we can all help keep it updated, and we can all subscribe to it? Let me know if you want to see my list, if that helps …
"This could be another Very Special Team" ... Superbowl winning Niners lineman Dan Audick ...
by LondonNiner on Nov 4, 2009 12:32 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
NEEDS MOAR SWEARING
NEKKID GIRLZ AND LOLCATS
that’s what he means by “content”
A hearty thank you to Rich Aurilia for all the good memories, and to the Niners for finally getting the uni's (mostly) right.
by wjackalope on Nov 4, 2009 10:52 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
You think I'm going to rise to your deliberate misspellings?
I could care less about them ;)
What this site does need is more of your brilliant graphics, wjackalope. Love from London x.
"This could be another Very Special Team" ... Superbowl winning Niners lineman Dan Audick ...
by LondonNiner on Nov 4, 2009 12:27 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
IT NEEDS MORE LIMEYS.
They call their best player "Kung Fu Panda" and they complain that people aren’t taking them or the game seriously enough? -Nick
by mikev on Nov 4, 2009 3:57 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
It needs Frankie Bunn.
"This could be another Very Special Team" ... Superbowl winning Niners lineman Dan Audick ...
by LondonNiner on Nov 5, 2009 12:37 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
From what I remember
I like it. The left hand column, which was useless, is gone.
"The questions are so stupid. I don't believe in rivalries. I don't believe in curses. Wake up the damn Bambino, maybe I'll drill him in the ass."
- Pedro Martinez, asked about the Curse of the Bambino
by achiappanza on Nov 4, 2009 5:46 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
Hmm
I noticed I went back to my profile and tried to find a post I made recently, but when I clicked on the title name it only opened up the page with the thread but it did not autoscroll exactly to the location where the post was.
I liked it before so if I want to find someones post and click it from their profile, it actually scrolls to it which makes it easy in really big threads.
by fortyniners on Nov 4, 2009 9:02 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
That’s probably a temporary bug. I noticed a bunch of things right after the switch that have almost all been fixed already. I’m sure that will get kinked out pretty soon.
Context, people. More context is good. Less context is bad. If you're willing to be reductive, then you're willing to be wrong.
by howtheyscored on Nov 4, 2009 9:22 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Updates
Looks like they’ve made some changes, including boosting the post title font size. I think that particular change is a big one.
by Fooch on Nov 5, 2009 8:50 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
Yeah, they asked me what I thought in an email.
I’m very happy, the headlines size/boldness seems to make a huge different to how I view the site. I get the feeling that it doesn’t need to be centered anymore. Though with it being un-centered, lowercase titles seem to look a little weird.
That of course, is coming strictly from a grammar nazi point of view.
You can never resist the game... nor could I... we're the same, so don't even try.
by Ninjames on Nov 5, 2009 9:48 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
After a few days
I can’t even remember what the old layout was. In other words, I now like the new layout but I still wish the titles of the articles were formatted in center-text, not left.
by Andrew Davidson on Nov 8, 2009 8:18 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
Join the community and dive in!
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Certain photos copyright © 2009 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
