|restatement of explanation for new chages to RoadbikeREVIEW||gregg|
Aug 30, 2001 2:21 PM
In a thread below, I attempted to answer some concerns from the community about all the new changes here on the site. I wanted to take some time to expand on one of those concerns. Specifically, the concern about "Why did we change?" In a nutshell, the reasons are:
- more reliable architecture: the new site is now built on a better platform that is on redundant servers, thus less down time. We now have the scalability to handle our growth
- easier to maintain. The old site was used many different tools and software and it was increasingly difficult for us to maintain and update.
- improve and expand resources for the site: RoadbikeREVIEW has to be profitable enough to ensure that this resource is available for many years to come
- better User Interface: design is cleaner and pages load faster (i.e. we no longer have pages that are 900k big).
- a more secure environment: we now require registration for reviews and posting
Thanks to your feedback, we have made adjustments (like the newly darkened text), and we are busy making more.
Thank you for reading this.
-gregg, Site Manager RoadbikeREVIEW.com
|re: restatement of explanation for new chages to RoadbikeREVIEW||AMS|
Aug 30, 2001 2:52 PM
So how do I go about getting my old screen name back?
|please email me here...||gregg|
Aug 30, 2001 3:15 PM
|firstname.lastname@example.org with your user name and I will try to track down your log-in problem (warning, there are others in the queue ahead of you to resolve this problem).
|Personally, I LIKE IT!||mr_spin|
Aug 30, 2001 3:02 PM
|Except for the HTML in titles, I think it looks a lot better. Definitely more "modern."|
|thanks, I'll be sure to let our graphic design guy know that ...||gregg|
Aug 30, 2001 3:15 PM
|...not everyone hates it!|
|How about font sizing||Monte2|
Aug 30, 2001 3:03 PM
|Are there plans in the works to allow for the custom sizing of the font? In the past I used the font sizing function in IE5.5 from medium to larger depending upon whether I was using my laptop or desktop.|
|there's some debate as to the font size.||gregg|
Aug 30, 2001 3:17 PM
|if we go up to 13 there is no visible difference in the message boards (area that needs to be most easily readable). Then if we go up to 14, things start to look jacked up (spacing wrong, overlap and stuff like that). We are looking for a happy middle ground on this. I am personally fighting for a larger font size or a thicker font.
|That's an understatement. Here are links to some screencaps @ 1280x1024||Cliff Oates|
Aug 30, 2001 3:40 PM
|Gregg, here are a few screencaps from my system running 1280x1024 with system fonts at 125% of normal:
If you guys don't increase the font size, I will go blind. My work machine runs at 1024x768 (darned IBM StinkPad) and the display is perfectly OK at that resolution. It's tough at 1280 and the folks running at 1600 have already ripped out their eyeballs...
Aug 30, 2001 3:14 PM
|I was a little taken back when the format changed. I'm used to things staying like they are. But in this day and age that isn't reasonable. things change. This forum has changed a couple of times in the past year or so, always for the better. It's just hard to get up in the morning and click on the forum and having something different staring you in the face. It's looking better already and I'm beginning to like it...the darkened text helps alot...thanks for all your help. We have nothing to complain about, it's free........|
|complaints are tough, but intelligent, helpful feedback is ....||gregg|
Aug 30, 2001 3:21 PM
|re: restatement of explanation for new chages to RoadbikeREVIEW||peloton|
Aug 30, 2001 3:37 PM
|Thanks for the darker type, Greg. It is a lot easier on the eyes now. I like the overall look of the new site. It is a lot more clean looking, before there was a lot going on. It's also a lot easier to get on the messageboards without having to go through two screens. I do look forward though to a larger or darker font in the messageboards. Overall though, it looks good even if it was a little suprise at first.|
|Any plan to migrate the old reviews to the new reviews?||Tig|
Aug 30, 2001 3:55 PM
|The reviews were very helpful. A large database helps us decide if a product is right for us or not. I welcome a complete listing of reviews instead of the limited ones I see now.
|yes, working on it! (nm)||gregg|
Aug 31, 2001 9:25 AM
|re: restatement of explanation for new chages to RoadbikeREVIEW||Skip|
Aug 30, 2001 6:12 PM
|Gregg, so far, for me, it is definitely not faster. It takes 5-6 seconds loading to go from the main page to the reply page; and 8-9 seconds to return back to the main page.|
|working on server speed, load balancing please hang tight (nm)||gregg|
Aug 31, 2001 9:56 AM
|Gregg, nice changes but one Problem!||Bappo|
Aug 30, 2001 7:05 PM
|I think everything about the site is more professional, er, cleaner. One nasty though.
Your new forum servers (forums13 and forums14) are conducting netbios scans on port 137 which is being blocked by my firewall. Port 137 along with 138 and 139 are not to be trifled with as there are known vulnerabilities there in windows. It is possible that it is strictly a function of your servers running windows and a stupid bug is coming through. Dunno. I just know that those of us using firewalls will get annoyed and those that aren't should to block 137-139 at the very least.
Gregg, you might want to have your server dude check things out.
Everyone should go to http:\\grc.com and see how secure your comp is. Quite enlightening. grc is a "goodguy" site and has free programs like shields up that check your security and great recommendations.
Aug 31, 2001 10:08 AM
|...went right over my head! But I will ask our IT guy about this one.
Aug 31, 2001 2:34 PM
|Well, geeks ride bikes too!|
|Easy for you to say... (nm)||RhodyRider|
Aug 31, 2001 11:58 AM
|My constructive criticism is:||girodebirdman|
Aug 30, 2001 8:00 PM
|There is no longer a "Wanted to buy" section in the classifed, possibly the most useful feature of the classified. This is where I can locate hard-to-find parts like 27.0mm crown races and headset reducer cups. Without this, I am going to be hard-pressed to do my restorations. Please re-insert this feature somewhere into the site, it would be much appreicated.|
|considering possibility of adding it as a message board but...||gregg|
Aug 31, 2001 9:58 AM
|...this leaves us vulnerable to abuse of the message board forums as a work-around to the marketplace. This has been requested on mtbr and we are still debating on it.
|Marketplace problem||Eric H|
Aug 30, 2001 10:17 PM
|When I attempt to register for the marketplace section, I have to give a ZIP code. However, I live in CANADA and my postal code is six alphanumeric characters. This presents a problem. Any plans to make the marketplace "global"?
|Allowing Canadian zip codes is priority #1 on Nextags list||gregg|
Aug 31, 2001 9:59 AM
|We apologize for the oversight to all our Canadian users. We have given this to Nextag to fix as priority #1.
|Allowing Canadian zip codes is priority #1 on Nextags list||MJ|
Aug 31, 2001 12:34 PM
|not to open another can of worms :-) - but we're not all in North America - global is global!|
|Thanks Gregg...||Len J|
Aug 31, 2001 3:30 AM
|for the continued communication.
What are the priorities for fixes/Changes?
Relocation of items between topic & body of post.
|priorities is tough to say...||gregg|
Aug 31, 2001 10:04 AM
|...easy things like darker text is a slam dunk. Bigger font is up to debate and I will have to present this to the other site managers and design people. The problem is that size 14 starts to screw up other formatting.
As far as the priorities, I would have to say:
-updating the reviews categories and structure
-fixing Netscape unicode problem (if we can)
lower priority is:
Basically, if it's low-priority but it's easy, we will try to do it right away. If it is low-priority but takes more to do it, it will have to wait. Top priority is for usability/functionality bugs.
I think that's about it.
|change management suggestion||Duane Gran|
Aug 31, 2001 3:40 AM
|Possibly I missed this, but since everyone else was taken off guard I feel safe to say this. It would have been a good idea to put up a mock up design somewhere and ask users of this system what they thought of it. This is a smoother way to handle a transition. It is normal for some things to slip through the cracks and for people to have issues with any change, but you can go a long to way ease the transition by forwarning and involving the community ahead of time.|
|Gregg responded earlier............||Len J|
Aug 31, 2001 3:47 AM
|saying that they had a mockup in the "What's new" section of the board for about 2 months prior to the change. Unfortunatly, like most of us, I didn't ever go to the "What's new" section so like you, I was also caught off guard. I suggested to Gregg that next time they are going to do something like this, that he just post something on the General board telling us to look on the What's new section.
Most frequent users are probably not going to go to the "What's new" section without prompting.
|thank you||Duane Gran|
Aug 31, 2001 7:31 AM
|Thanks for the clarification. Yeah, it looks like this method slipped past the veterans. I commend their effort to try to do this, but you are right about a posting to the boards being in order.|
|yes, I should have posted more on the boards....||gregg|
Aug 31, 2001 10:05 AM
|...I posted the classifieds change, but I probably should have posted in general and components about when the change was coming exactly.
|Too far right||Scott H|
Aug 31, 2001 5:28 AM
|I only have too small complaints, the actual forum text only takes up the right side of the screen and I have to keep scrolling over to get to it. I read at work so I can't keep my browser window very large. It seems like a waste of space to me. Also, the fonts are very small, but I can live with that.
|yeah,this is kinda annoying but to be honest is lower prioritynm||gregg|
Aug 31, 2001 10:07 AM