One of the main gripes that people have is that they don't have their browsers maximised.
How are the BBC supposed to know that. The easy solution is to work on a % of the browser width but then the same people would come back complaining about the about of vertical scrolling needed.
One of the main gripes that people have is that they don't have their browsers maximised.
How are the BBC supposed to know that. The easy solution is to work on a % of the browser width but then the same people would come back complaining about the about of vertical scrolling needed.
Isn't it a bit dim of them to not assume everyone is multitasking with browsers not maximised? Is Auntie still using DOS or something?
Isn't it a bit dim of them to not assume everyone is multitasking with browsers not maximised? Is Auntie still using DOS or something?
You have a taskbar to switch between windows, you don't need to not have them maximised to swap between different things. And how is that a problem anyway? All you have to do is make the window wider if you don't want to maximise them.
1024 is not an unreasonable width to use, anything with a fixed page width that is narrower than that is too narrow and leaves too much blank space with it maximised (which most people will have) unless they have an ancient monitor.
I could see your point if they made it 1680 or something (which would nicely fit my screen), but 1024 will be fine for the vast majority of people.
The huge colour blocks at the top are unneccesary, the news pages are too white, the font colours too pale, and I don't like the links on the left side of the page for sport, entertainment etc not being colour coded as they were before.
It's all to antiseptically clean and spaced out for my taste.
You have a taskbar to switch between windows, you don't need to not have them maximised to swap between different things. And how is that a problem anyway? All you have to do is make the window wider if you don't want to maximise them.
1024 is not an unreasonable width to use, anything with a fixed page width that is narrower than that is too narrow and leaves too much blank space with it maximised (which most people will have) unless they have an ancient monitor.
I could see your point if they made it 1680 or something (which would nicely fit my screen), but 1024 will be fine for the vast majority of people.
I don't really understand why it needs to be fixed width anyway
I have my browser/mail client maximised on one screen with my work on the other.....that's not an archaic way of multitasking!
That's just showing off
Forgot to say the BBC's wonderful web site is one of the few that are really hard work to view using a PSP.
Auntie likes to appear international and available to all. Impoverished people using third-hand VGA's are not going to find the Beeb site very user friendly.
Anytime anyone changes anything there will be a percentage of people who will hate the change. Come back in a month or so and most of them will have got used to it - but you can't please all of the people all of the time.
Personally, I like it. As with most redesigns it could do with a few tweaks (lose the black bar) but change to the news site was inevitable following the recent homepage update.
I also like the new mobile site - it looks great on my Blackberry
"It was so much better in the olden day"... go back in time to see how it looked way back in the late 90s and early 2000s:
BBC News no longer fits in my browser. Every other website does. I have to maximise the IE window to full screen, which is quite annoying. I have a widescreen monitor.
It's the opposite for me. Usually BBC News takes up about 2/3 of the screen, with a big white band down the side. Now it fills the whole screen. The font needs to be bolder though.
The large image on the BBC homepage looks very good & I love the clock. Shame it's not on the news site.
If your serious about multitasking you should have more than one monitor.
Yes, all very well for those that have the room and cash.
Auntie is still out of order to presume anything about anyone's screen sizes and resolutions. It's sad to see the Beeb's formerly high technical standards slipping.
Auntie is still out of order to presume anything about anyone's screen sizes and resolutions. It's sad to see the Beeb's formerly high technical standards slipping.
So do you suggest they design their website for the benefit of people viewing at 800x600?
So do you suggest they design their website for the benefit of people viewing at 800x600?
Hmm, well I would suggest you could direct the question to any of the other posters who made the same observations as me for a change. As for the Beeb, they could see what w3.org suggest
Yes, all very well for those that have the room and cash.
Auntie is still out of order to presume anything about anyone's screen sizes and resolutions. It's sad to see the Beeb's formerly high technical standards slipping.
Should they cater for those still using green screens? At some point they need to move on, it's not as if 1024 is an excessively high resolution.
Comments
How are the BBC supposed to know that. The easy solution is to work on a % of the browser width but then the same people would come back complaining about the about of vertical scrolling needed.
The extra space has been used for big gaps rather than more information, and the loss of any background colours makes it hard to pick sections out.
I really think it was time to use the refresh to be a bit smarter about how the site responded to browser size too.
Phazer
1024 is not an unreasonable width to use, anything with a fixed page width that is narrower than that is too narrow and leaves too much blank space with it maximised (which most people will have) unless they have an ancient monitor.
I could see your point if they made it 1680 or something (which would nicely fit my screen), but 1024 will be fine for the vast majority of people.
It's all to antiseptically clean and spaced out for my taste.
I don't really understand why it needs to be fixed width anyway
I have my browser/mail client maximised on one screen with my work on the other.....that's not an archaic way of multitasking!
Forgot to say the BBC's wonderful web site is one of the few that are really hard work to view using a PSP.
Auntie likes to appear international and available to all. Impoverished people using third-hand VGA's are not going to find the Beeb site very user friendly.
There seems to be a lot of white space
I'm assuming the bars down the sides are to cater for people who don't have wide screen VDUs
Personally, I like it. As with most redesigns it could do with a few tweaks (lose the black bar) but change to the news site was inevitable following the recent homepage update.
I also like the new mobile site - it looks great on my Blackberry
"It was so much better in the olden day"... go back in time to see how it looked way back in the late 90s and early 2000s:
http://web.archive.org/web/*/http://www.bbc.co.uk
If your serious about multitasking you should have more than one monitor.
It's the opposite for me. Usually BBC News takes up about 2/3 of the screen, with a big white band down the side. Now it fills the whole screen. The font needs to be bolder though.
The large image on the BBC homepage looks very good & I love the clock. Shame it's not on the news site.
The worst designed news site is now ITN.
Auntie is still out of order to presume anything about anyone's screen sizes and resolutions. It's sad to see the Beeb's formerly high technical standards slipping.
I can't see a link.
Should they cater for those still using green screens? At some point they need to move on, it's not as if 1024 is an excessively high resolution.
http://www.w3schools.com/browsers/browsers_display.asp