Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

eppur_se_muova

(36,299 posts)
Wed May 13, 2015, 11:26 AM May 2015

Am I the only one who thinks the BBC's new Web pages really suck ?

Last edited Wed May 13, 2015, 12:05 PM - Edit history (1)

Apparently, things like borders and headings are "out"; the new style is lots of white background and pix as wide as possible. Nothing to break up a page into sections and impose some sort of organization. Oh, and screw you if you don't have a jumbo monitor.

I noticed a while back they were trying out this look on some isolated pages, which made it hard to cite their pages -- text in titles could not be copied, and image locations come with massive amounts of gobbledygook code which made it impossible to copy them, and slowed Firefox to a crawl. Now it is their default style.

Change for the sake of change, at the cost of injury to utility.

13 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
 

olddots

(10,237 posts)
1. I notice the decline in commercial art skills everywhere
Wed May 13, 2015, 11:36 AM
May 2015

soon only machines will comunicate with machines

 

Basic LA

(2,047 posts)
2. Change for change sake.
Wed May 13, 2015, 11:41 AM
May 2015

The same ugly philosophy has been going on at Flickr, constant changes that are hated by all, each worse than the last, never ending.

FSogol

(45,529 posts)
3. The entire web is getting terrible in the rush to format content for mobile users.
Wed May 13, 2015, 11:43 AM
May 2015

Gone are text, articles, facts, expositions, etc
Replacing it are speak-n-spell type pictograms, talking points, and clickbait.

TreasonousBastard

(43,049 posts)
4. EVERYBODY's new web pages suck...
Wed May 13, 2015, 12:26 PM
May 2015

I have no idea what the point is for 100 pages of bullshit code generated by some insane utility. Gobs of cookies, trackers, and other spy stuff in that code telling Google and the site owners more about me than telling me about them doesn't cut it.

On my home computer I might wait for a minute for the damn pages to settle down and then can't copy text. Optimum keeps bragging about their download speed, but then it takes forever for their own pages to load.

Our phones and the internet are that vacuum that as they get faster must be filled with bullshit.

I found some old pages I put together in HTML 4 and they loaded in microseconds-- looked damn good, too.

hunter

(38,328 posts)
5. Yes. I'm not liking this new internet environment...
Wed May 13, 2015, 02:04 PM
May 2015

...where everything is designed to magically arrange itself on both smart phone screens and giant monitors, and it all looks horrible.

The very thing that attracted me to the World Wide Web, the economy and simplicity of HTML, has been discarded so commercial interests can push abominations like advertisements that move, or even worse, make noise.

Sometimes I want to burn it all down, and start all over again at some simple place that renders everything in the user's preferred terminal style.

Occasionally I'll write or find a script to render sites the way I want to see them, but that's a bother, and I shouldn't have to do it. The default style of any site should be MY STYLE and I like it simple.

DCBob

(24,689 posts)
7. Yes, its the issue with making everything mobile friendly... the lowest common denominator.
Wed May 13, 2015, 02:10 PM
May 2015

Its ruining the internet in my opinion.

eppur_se_muova

(36,299 posts)
9. Maybe this foreshadows a split into two Webs ...
Wed May 13, 2015, 05:16 PM
May 2015

one for mobiles, one for everyone else. That would be fine by me, I don't use my phone for anything but a phone. But I bet the non-mobile sites would be treated as second-class. Mobile users are in a bigger hurry to be separated from their cash -- I long ago decided the iPhone was basically a tool for spending money.

Maybe we'll have to go back to fidonet, or something. I kind of like the idea of a People's Web -- no commerce.

hunter

(38,328 posts)
10. That's how BBC was set up previously.
Wed May 13, 2015, 06:16 PM
May 2015

The "full" web site and an abbreviated mobile site.

Now it's edited as a single site and the software takes care of the rest.

rocktivity

(44,577 posts)
8. Google announced a few weeks ago that non-mobile friendly web sites would lose ranking
Wed May 13, 2015, 02:40 PM
May 2015

Last edited Wed May 13, 2015, 05:01 PM - Edit history (6)

to those that were. But that's no excuse for contracting "full-width fever" and sacrificing desktop/laptop design for tablet/smartphone. Thankfully WordPress and some others are showing that you can design for them simultaneously and have the best of both worlds.

Change for the sake of change? That explains the rush to left sidebars and single-column blog pages -- everybody's doing it because now everybody can do it. But rest assured a counter-revolution has begun: someone has made a right-sidebar WordPress theme already, and here's a site I'm working on:

http://branchburgnj.com


rocktivity


nationalize the fed

(2,169 posts)
12. I just clicked on the TV tab to find out what to watch tonight
Wed May 13, 2015, 06:46 PM
May 2015

And look what popped up





It's as if Siobhan Sharpe, Anna Rampton and Will Humphries (Cool, Yeah?) were real characters!



W1A is hilarious. Last episode of the series tomorrow!

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Am I the only one who thi...