Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!


LowEndBox v2.0 is LIVE! - Page 3
New on LowEndTalk? Please Register and read our Community Rules.

All new Registrations are manually reviewed and approved, so a short delay after registration may occur before your account becomes active.

LowEndBox v2.0 is LIVE!

13

Comments

  • emghemgh Member

    Damn, just saw the new design. Looks really weird. Extremely confusing. No one can honestly believe that it's better now.

    Thanked by 2adly bulbasaur
  • emghemgh Member

    @jbiloh: Hey @Not_Oles we really need to get some SEO traffic to LEB, I've heard internally linking keywords might help with SEO btw

    @Not_Oles: Alright, how's this https://lowendbox.com/blog/how-to-check-ecc-memory-on-a-hetzner-dedicated-server/?

  • Looks great, only thing that bugs me is the font changes when loading.

  • jbilohjbiloh Administrator, Veteran

    @emg said:
    Congrats on the new website. It must feel good to see your hard work come to fruition.

    You got me to look. I have not been on LEB for a while. It encouraged me to sign up for my first new VPS in eight years. Your new website must be working. At least it worked on me. :-)

    I loved reading this!

    Thanked by 1emg
  • jbilohjbiloh Administrator, Veteran

    @emgh said:
    Damn, just saw the new design. Looks really weird. Extremely confusing. No one can honestly believe that it's better now.

    We are making some tweaks over the next couple days.

    If you have suggestions we are happy to hear them.

    Thanked by 1Not_Oles
  • LordSpockLordSpock Member, Host Rep

    @AXYZE said:

    @LordSpock said:

    @AXYZE said:

    @LordSpock said:

    @AXYZE said:
    And wild idea.

    Before

    After

    You may say it's too much green, but hey! Doesn't it add personality? Like, isn't that more friendly, more rememberable, less 'corporative'?
    Apart from obvious color change I also added

    border-radius:10px

    to 'div.frontpage'. I hate many sharp edges in main containers, idk.

    Quite inaccessible for any users who might need clear contrast between text and background.

    Contrast ratio between #3D3D3D and #F4FFF4 10.58:1, WCAG requirement is 4.5:1.
    Its more than twice what is required, what research/standard are you following that you say its "quite inaccessible"?

    It should reduce strain if anything.

    The green links on the green background is 3.58:1. WCAG AAA is 7:1 (AA is 4.5). (Both designs are poor on that front).

    Aaaahh! I thought you meant main content dark grey color.
    Of course green textlinks in this box should be darker! :)

    I just tweaked background colors and rounded border of box - its not final design, just idea to show different approach - instead of easily forgettable, "corporative" white design we can play with colors :)

    WCAG AA is more than enough from testing we have done on different groups (e-commerce, so we analyze it to maximize conversions) and from research articles I have read from institutes, but there are of course other variables (black text and dark grey bg is less readable than white text and light grey bg even tho contrast values are the same etc...) so even if something is not above that value there is still a fair chance it will be easily readable. And fair chance it wont. :) But AA is this nice middle ground where you can get crazy with color and be sure people can see it clearly.

    I'm partially colorblind so I already know about this stuff and tested it in a lot of cases, but if you say AA is not enough and I should target AAA then could you share more? Maybe I need to refresh my knowledge :)

    Looking at it from an eCommerce perspective, I think AA is absolutely fine. Especially using it for things like CTAs and what not.

    For long form content like blogs, the highest contrast possible I believe is always the best choice - accompanied by fonts with good inter-letter and inter-word spacing. I'm dyslexic and usually struggle to concentrate whilst reading longer form content.

    I don't really ever work with websites or documents that are used for sales. It's usually to convey fairly important information - so being a bit corporate is actually okay.

    Thanked by 1AXYZE
  • Not_OlesNot_Oles Moderator, Patron Provider

    @emgh said: No one can honestly believe that it's better now.

    We like the new design, which will become even better thanks to helpful suggestions we are receiving.

    @emgh said: internally linking keywords might help with SEO btw

    @Not_Oles: Alright, how's this https://lowendbox.com/blog/how-to-check-ecc-memory-on-a-hetzner-dedicated-server/?

    Most people who are interested in the subject post or in one of the linked posts are likely also to be interested in the others. Maybe I could have linked the group together better. If you have any specific suggestions, please pass them on to me.

    Best wishes,

    Tom :)

  • Thanks for the update. My suggestion is to add some separators for the article snippet blocks in the design.

  • jbilohjbiloh Administrator, Veteran

    @LordSpock said: Still broken on ultrawide monitors too (100% zoom, no DPI scaling. It's okay in larger zoom which I use normally anyway) (https://i.imgur.com/GPtoldS.png).

    Please test this now and let me know how it looks. Thank you! :)

  • jbilohjbiloh Administrator, Veteran

    @eTechie said:
    Thanks for the update. My suggestion is to add some separators for the article snippet blocks in the design.

    We've added some vertical separation lines. What do you think?

  • jbilohjbiloh Administrator, Veteran

    @emgh said:
    Damn, just saw the new design. Looks really weird. Extremely confusing. No one can honestly believe that it's better now.

    We have made about two dozen improvements to the design over the past 48 hours.

    What do you think now?

    Thanked by 1Not_Oles
  • ArkasArkas Moderator

    I think it looks great! Must have been a lot of work Jon, congrats!

  • Not_OlesNot_Oles Moderator, Patron Provider

    Just looked on mobile. Looks great! I scrolled all the way to the bottom, and I didn't spot even a single issue. Congrats @jbiloh!

  • JasonMJasonM Member

    @jbiloh
    In my earlier post I said the site looks great.
    But accessing same from mobile there is some distraction on the Post pages.
    After the Post ends, there are 6 pods/blocks (called Related Posts) that needs to be scrolled vertically downwards to read/write the comments. Those have very big images, that does not look quite distraction on desktop, but on mobile YES!

    If the size of those images are scaled down in mobile version that would be easy for users to scroll down. Or else, you can keep an anchor hyperlink at end of the post and name it as "see comments" when clicked will automatically scroll the use down on the same page towards start of the comments.

  • emghemgh Member

    @jbiloh said:

    @emgh said:
    Damn, just saw the new design. Looks really weird. Extremely confusing. No one can honestly believe that it's better now.

    We have made about two dozen improvements to the design over the past 48 hours.

    What do you think now?

    Better but not great. The menu on mobile (iPhone 12 mini) takes up several scrolls. Should be hidden by default. Posts should be above the fold is my opinion.

    Thanked by 1adly
  • LordSpockLordSpock Member, Host Rep

    @jbiloh said:

    @LordSpock said: Still broken on ultrawide monitors too (100% zoom, no DPI scaling. It's okay in larger zoom which I use normally anyway) (https://i.imgur.com/GPtoldS.png).

    Please test this now and let me know how it looks. Thank you! :)

    Perfect!

  • jbilohjbiloh Administrator, Veteran

    @emgh said:

    @jbiloh said:

    @emgh said:
    Damn, just saw the new design. Looks really weird. Extremely confusing. No one can honestly believe that it's better now.

    We have made about two dozen improvements to the design over the past 48 hours.

    What do you think now?

    Better but not great. The menu on mobile (iPhone 12 mini) takes up several scrolls. Should be hidden by default. Posts should be above the fold is my opinion.

    Which menu are you referring to?

  • jbilohjbiloh Administrator, Veteran

    @JasonM said:
    @jbiloh
    In my earlier post I said the site looks great.
    But accessing same from mobile there is some distraction on the Post pages.
    After the Post ends, there are 6 pods/blocks (called Related Posts) that needs to be scrolled vertically downwards to read/write the comments. Those have very big images, that does not look quite distraction on desktop, but on mobile YES!

    If the size of those images are scaled down in mobile version that would be easy for users to scroll down. Or else, you can keep an anchor hyperlink at end of the post and name it as "see comments" when clicked will automatically scroll the use down on the same page towards start of the comments.

    Good suggestion, I'll see what adjustments can be made to "Related Posts" on mobile.

  • jbilohjbiloh Administrator, Veteran

    @Arkas said:
    I think it looks great! Must have been a lot of work Jon, congrats!

    Thank you! Team effort.

    @Not_Oles said:
    Just looked on mobile. Looks great! I scrolled all the way to the bottom, and I didn't spot even a single issue. Congrats @jbiloh!

    We are indeed making progress! :)

    Thanked by 1Not_Oles
  • KebabKebab Member

    @MeAtExampleDotCom said:

    @Kebab said: I don't like that it's too wide, I don't like moving my head.

    You could always use a thinner browser window? Or zoom or high-DPI settings, and sit further back.

    “Your design is too wide when I have the browser full width on my monitor that is uncomfortably wide for my field of view when I sit close to it” always puts me in mind of Red Dwarf's “also, human eyes don't seem to have a zoom function” in reverse!

    Under Windows you can use the default half-screen behaviour (win+left or win+right - though at 1920px with default scaling it doesn't look good half-screen, I'm not near the bigger screens to check on them ATM), or for finer grained control there is FancyZones in MS' PowerToys and a number of 3rd party options, and there have similar options on Linux (depending on what window/desktop manager you prefer) for as long as I can remember using it much on desktop.

    or the site could be thinner

  • Looks terrible.

  • jbilohjbiloh Administrator, Veteran

    @Anna_Parker said:
    Looks terrible.

    Any constructive feedback?

    Thanked by 1Not_Oles
  • jbilohjbiloh Administrator, Veteran

    @Kebab said:

    @MeAtExampleDotCom said:

    @Kebab said: I don't like that it's too wide, I don't like moving my head.

    You could always use a thinner browser window? Or zoom or high-DPI settings, and sit further back.

    “Your design is too wide when I have the browser full width on my monitor that is uncomfortably wide for my field of view when I sit close to it” always puts me in mind of Red Dwarf's “also, human eyes don't seem to have a zoom function” in reverse!

    Under Windows you can use the default half-screen behaviour (win+left or win+right - though at 1920px with default scaling it doesn't look good half-screen, I'm not near the bigger screens to check on them ATM), or for finer grained control there is FancyZones in MS' PowerToys and a number of 3rd party options, and there have similar options on Linux (depending on what window/desktop manager you prefer) for as long as I can remember using it much on desktop.

    or the site could be thinner

    I will look at options to see if we can cut the width by 5-7% by reducing margins, etc. It's too late to make any major changes.

  • @jbiloh said:

    @Kebab said:

    @MeAtExampleDotCom said:

    @Kebab said: I don't like that it's too wide, I don't like moving my head.

    You could always use a thinner browser window? Or zoom or high-DPI settings, and sit further back.

    “Your design is too wide when I have the browser full width on my monitor that is uncomfortably wide for my field of view when I sit close to it” always puts me in mind of Red Dwarf's “also, human eyes don't seem to have a zoom function” in reverse!

    Under Windows you can use the default half-screen behaviour (win+left or win+right - though at 1920px with default scaling it doesn't look good half-screen, I'm not near the bigger screens to check on them ATM), or for finer grained control there is FancyZones in MS' PowerToys and a number of 3rd party options, and there have similar options on Linux (depending on what window/desktop manager you prefer) for as long as I can remember using it much on desktop.

    or the site could be thinner

    I will look at options to see if we can cut the width by 5-7% by reducing margins, etc. It's too late to make any major changes.

    The boxed layout is ridiculously stupid.

    People don't read blogs for images, they read it for content.

    Make it easy for people to consume your content.

    Seems like a designer or programmer came up with that.

  • jbilohjbiloh Administrator, Veteran
    edited July 2022

    @SirFoxy said:

    @jbiloh said:

    @Kebab said:

    @MeAtExampleDotCom said:

    @Kebab said: I don't like that it's too wide, I don't like moving my head.

    You could always use a thinner browser window? Or zoom or high-DPI settings, and sit further back.

    “Your design is too wide when I have the browser full width on my monitor that is uncomfortably wide for my field of view when I sit close to it” always puts me in mind of Red Dwarf's “also, human eyes don't seem to have a zoom function” in reverse!

    Under Windows you can use the default half-screen behaviour (win+left or win+right - though at 1920px with default scaling it doesn't look good half-screen, I'm not near the bigger screens to check on them ATM), or for finer grained control there is FancyZones in MS' PowerToys and a number of 3rd party options, and there have similar options on Linux (depending on what window/desktop manager you prefer) for as long as I can remember using it much on desktop.

    or the site could be thinner

    I will look at options to see if we can cut the width by 5-7% by reducing margins, etc. It's too late to make any major changes.

    The boxed layout is ridiculously stupid.

    People don't read blogs for images, they read it for content.

    Make it easy for people to consume your content.

    Seems like a designer or programmer came up with that.

    So you'd prefer the 90's style text wall?

    Is it just a matter of image size (in that you'd prefer smaller headline images)?

  • ArkasArkas Moderator

    @SirFoxy said: Seems like a designer or programmer came up with that.

    And you're an expert because...?

  • @Arkas said:

    @SirFoxy said: Seems like a designer or programmer came up with that.

    And you're an expert because...?

    People pay me to increase engagement? I'm literally a fucking copywriter.

    Fuck off.

  • @jbiloh said:

    @SirFoxy said:

    @jbiloh said:

    @Kebab said:

    @MeAtExampleDotCom said:

    @Kebab said: I don't like that it's too wide, I don't like moving my head.

    You could always use a thinner browser window? Or zoom or high-DPI settings, and sit further back.

    “Your design is too wide when I have the browser full width on my monitor that is uncomfortably wide for my field of view when I sit close to it” always puts me in mind of Red Dwarf's “also, human eyes don't seem to have a zoom function” in reverse!

    Under Windows you can use the default half-screen behaviour (win+left or win+right - though at 1920px with default scaling it doesn't look good half-screen, I'm not near the bigger screens to check on them ATM), or for finer grained control there is FancyZones in MS' PowerToys and a number of 3rd party options, and there have similar options on Linux (depending on what window/desktop manager you prefer) for as long as I can remember using it much on desktop.

    or the site could be thinner

    I will look at options to see if we can cut the width by 5-7% by reducing margins, etc. It's too late to make any major changes.

    The boxed layout is ridiculously stupid.

    People don't read blogs for images, they read it for content.

    Make it easy for people to consume your content.

    Seems like a designer or programmer came up with that.

    So you'd prefer the 90's style text wall?

    Is it just a matter of image size (in that you'd prefer smaller headline images)?

    It's not about 90's style of text, you can still be modern.

    Let me ask you:

    Do people come to Lowendbox for the content?

  • jbilohjbiloh Administrator, Veteran

    @SirFoxy said:

    @jbiloh said:

    @SirFoxy said:

    @jbiloh said:

    @Kebab said:

    @MeAtExampleDotCom said:

    @Kebab said: I don't like that it's too wide, I don't like moving my head.

    You could always use a thinner browser window? Or zoom or high-DPI settings, and sit further back.

    “Your design is too wide when I have the browser full width on my monitor that is uncomfortably wide for my field of view when I sit close to it” always puts me in mind of Red Dwarf's “also, human eyes don't seem to have a zoom function” in reverse!

    Under Windows you can use the default half-screen behaviour (win+left or win+right - though at 1920px with default scaling it doesn't look good half-screen, I'm not near the bigger screens to check on them ATM), or for finer grained control there is FancyZones in MS' PowerToys and a number of 3rd party options, and there have similar options on Linux (depending on what window/desktop manager you prefer) for as long as I can remember using it much on desktop.

    or the site could be thinner

    I will look at options to see if we can cut the width by 5-7% by reducing margins, etc. It's too late to make any major changes.

    The boxed layout is ridiculously stupid.

    People don't read blogs for images, they read it for content.

    Make it easy for people to consume your content.

    Seems like a designer or programmer came up with that.

    So you'd prefer the 90's style text wall?

    Is it just a matter of image size (in that you'd prefer smaller headline images)?

    It's not about 90's style of text, you can still be modern.

    Let me ask you:

    Do people come to Lowendbox for the content?

    Content and deals.

    The old design caused both to get lost once they left the home page (4-5 recent blog posts). The new design makes content accessible and more quality stuff evergreen.

  • ArkasArkas Moderator

    @SirFoxy said: People pay me to increase engagement? I'm literally a fucking copywriter.

    And I'm a content creator, so?

    Fuck off.

    I see you are showing your copywriting skills :lol:

    Thanked by 1Not_Oles
Sign In or Register to comment.