Your are viewing a read-only archive of the old DiS boards. Please hit the Community button above to engage with the DiS !
What the fuck have you done Sean :(
And it don't tells you the author of the thread. And the font is like 72 when making a thread
several grumbling on twitter recently.
people wanted the mobile site to be as simple as possible and auto fit to screens. this is what we've done on a very small budget, with this rickety old website which doesn't like anything to be changed.
Its annoying but then it didn't post so I hope that gives the an idea of the general dismay I fee right now
and you can still see who started all the threads on the desktop site.
on the posts themselves.
this was an oversight and will be fixed.
It's looks good and seems to work well.
Just reinstate the thread author and it'll go from b to bd
What fresh hell???
And the side borders make it look mental 3D
Or is this a premium member only feature?
I've tried changing my user agent to mobile but it still doesn't bring up the mobile site
can get it on my phone though
There is a developer way of faking being a phone in chrome I think.
is for peeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeedophylz
thats what ahm tryin
oh wait, no I can't
For those instances where a mobile site has less (or worse) functionality than the non-mobile site.
Fixed that fucker quick sharp
It would be better if it still told you who/when the last post was made. So I don't waste my precious time reading threads that that I've already read like...
I'll be consulting some message board lawyers about this.
otherwise it's great!!
can this be sorted out pronto?
Makes threads a lucky dip!!11 fingers crossed I don't pick 'a jordan'
You can’t expect everyone to be a fan of you using the site as your own personal blog on which to post thread after thread of unfunny, inane brain farts.
I posted every thread
No idea why ESA insists on being so anti-choice.
and the screen wouldn't scroll to the left or right. It cut off everything to the right of someones username. The big Drowned In Sound at the top of the site just said Drowned In.
The auto-flow worked with an original post but when someone replied to it, it cut off part of their text because it went too far to the right.
I would upload a screen shot but my wifi is broken and I've hardly any 3g allowance left
I would have tried the mobile site but I don't know what the address is
it's the same url as the current site, it's a 'responsive' thing, so it knows what device you're using and adapts to that.
the first one.
normal site viewed on my phone. The box where you're able to reply seems small. At least I'll curtail my drunken replies to stuff at pubs around midnight.
Not even the good shit
No thanks sean
aside from who posted threads being a mystery, it works really well for me.
it's still on the site and the mobile version, so guessing so.
(Sent from my ipad)
can you pay my telephone bills?
do you pay my automo' bills?
if you did then maybe we could chill
I. dont. think. you. do.
you. and. me. are. through.
Once the thread author bug is sorted then this will be perfect. Thanks Sean
Ffs sort it out sean
all of them?
which device are you using?
T reply to the thread. I'm using the latest version of Dlphin on android. Obv I'm not now, but I was.
Few possible minor improvements:
1. show author (as said above), on OP but also on index page
2. "Back to [Board]" link at top of page, in addition to the one at the bottom
3. horizontal cellpadding in replies is a bit excessive, and uses up too much "real estate". Could be halved and still be very readable. Not even sure it's cellpadding now I look at it, 'coz it's only on the left. It's like a blank column or something...
1. Yep, top of the list.
2. Can't you just click back?
3. can you do me a screen grab to explain what you mean?
2. Well, yes, but in certain scenarios that won't force a reload of the index page, and if you've done some ^thising (maybe also if you've posted a reply; haven't tested yet), it won't take you back to the index but back to the page as first loaded.
It's not essential, but a link back to Index at top is a convenience for users, which anybody with all of about half a lesson in HTML could add, I imagine.
It's the way the boards work. It's hideously over complicated and not do terrible that it's worth spending £200 to fix.
esp. seeing as none of these are problems that need fixing as such, more about user-experience. Take 'em or leave 'em as suggestions — I really don't care — but if you were to pay someone £200 to make those three changes, I'd suggest you were being ripped off. I'd have a go at adding them, and reckon I could do the first two in 10 minutes (including the time it would take to familiarise myself with site structure, etc.), and I'm a complete novice in web design.
I guess if lots of people moan you could add a 'show desktop site' link.
My only bug bear is i have to keep logging in.
Log in issue may be a setting in your browser? I'm finding it near impossible to log out.
Or if you click from Twitter or Facebook you'd need to login in their browser windows.
If anyone else is having an issue tho I'll investigate.
Before the redesign users had the option of using the mobile site by going to a particular URL.
Now if you access the site from a mobile device you're automatically made to use the mobile site, which is (by design, and with good reason) less functional/feature-heavy as the desktop site.
And there isn't an option to opt out of the mobile site in the way that most websites allow you to (by telling your browser to tell the webserver that it's a proper computer and not a mobile device, honest guv).
I think that's a big step backwards in usability, and as someone who primarily accesses the site through a mobile device, I find that frustrating.
1) There are so many legacy issues with our code that making any complicated changes breaks things (see: tiny thread titles, community disappearing for no reason from tablet site, etc)
2) We've had to make some compromises to make the mobile site as quickly and simply as possible. I don't understand why phones can't still see the previous site if they wanted to, but there was a lot of stuff that I was told wasn't possibly within the budget/time-frame.
3) We only had £500 to do this, which is only a day and a half of developer time. If anyone would like to donate any time to help improve the mobile site or fix any of the 223 bugs, it'd be much appreciated, as we're now £3k over budget for the site rebuild (paid for my monies set aside from the better months of ad income over the past 2 years...annoyingly we had a few really bad months this year)
Sorry it isn't ideal, but at least we're not charging anyone anything. And if some simple solutions can be found to things which are a BIG PROBLEM for anyone then we will try to remedy things.
Which is simply: you should ideally have provided the option for users on mobile devices to not have to use the mobile site. Not by implementing some massively expensive system, but by using the same method that the rest of the internet uses rather than some totally Mexico auto-detection thing which leaves mobile users no option but to use an underfunded, compromise of a mobile site.
That isn't a budget issue. That's a developer choice issue.
I don't care how fancy the mobile site is or isn't. The problem is the lack of the very very common functionality of being able to choose not to use it.
that deciding which version of a site gets served up based on (as I understand) screen resolution (rather than on what my browser tells the site to do), with no way to circumvent that, is an annoyance.
The version of DiS I end up with in Opera Mobile on a Galaxy S2 is an improvement on the old mobile site (does more than just linear view) and certainly has some benefits over the main/full site (dispenses with thd bullshit of twitter and facebook buttons and plugins, which are an arse on a PC, let alone a phone). BUT... on an 800x480 screen just about every site looks better and/or is more useable in the desktop incarnation than the cut down mobile site. That's a resolution that was a minimum credible standard on a decent touchscreen phone from the release of the HTC Desire nearly four years ago. The San Francisco made that resolution an expected minimum on a ~£100 PAYG level phone less than six months later. SO... whilst it's great that you've come up with a basic mobile version for people with phones that have a lesser screen than has been the acceptable minimum for the last three and a half years or so, it's less great that this version is enforced on phones that can happily browse the full version.
Double tap resizing, pinch zooming, swiping/scrolling/panning are all touchscreen functions that make browsing feel kinda perverse when you're on a site that forces a mobile version which has removed the ability to use those functions.
Hell, even my Nokia E71, released over five years ago, with a non-touchscreen resolution of 320x240, was happy enough with the full site, cos Opera Mini just took the site, and rendered it vertically to suit.
As I say, the new mobile site is ok (and will become pretty good with a couple of tweaks). But not being able to choose to go to the full site is a downer.
I'm not sure why you can't choose the previous way of seeing the desktop site either, but given the limited budget we had to create this (most people quoted me £3k to make a mobile optimised version of the site, some were FAR MORE) I imagine there is a reason why you can't currently see the desktop site on mobile.
I had no issues with the desktop site on mobile, but I had in the region of 70 complaints from people about it (most grumbles on Twitter and Facebook, rather than here), and also our advertisers wanted to serve mobile campaigns. It was quite annoying clicking through from Twitter or Facebook to read an article, and this is how most of our traffic ends up coming to the mobile site.
I realise a lot of you use the boards from mobile, and we'll do all that we can to improve it, but it will be down to the developer putting in time for free now, as I've got no money until February at the earliest.
my understanding is that i can't choose the previous (full, desktop) way of seeing the desktop site because you override my browser settings and serve up what you think is best based on screen size.
70 complaints via social media losers versus the silent and happy masses using massively unremarkable, but hugely capable mobile devices with screen resolutions of 800x480 screen (or more). hmmm.
"It was quite annoying clicking through from Twitter or Facebook to read an article, and this is how most of our traffic ends up coming to the mobile site." I'm not arguing against having a mobile site. The nice mobile site you have isn't the problem. It's the way it's imposed, rather than being an option.
All the best, big dog. It must be pretty annoying to get whines like this, but I hope you can see them as feedback rather than attacks got the sake of it. We wouldn't bother hanging around to connect if we didn't care on some level.
Sans-serif font on WHITE background.
Can you provide a way to switch to that view on desktop?
Or maybe can but I'm too stupid to work it out
Just need to add dashboard and notes as links in the roll-out menu.
Tried to keep the drop-down as succinct as possible.
We can more easily add those links to the footer on the main site, to ensure they appear on mobile - we haven't made templates for those pages, so hopefully they work ok.
a simple three column table would do the trick:
It's not pretty, but no uglier than what's already there, and makes better use of page space.
Those would all be too small to click on with your thumb.
2) I think some advanced users use their index finger for browsing
The longest of the current links in the menu (community) is maybe 1/4 width of the big arse square that rolls out when you open the menu. So you could easily fit 3 words the length of community across that space at current point size. Add some vertical cell padding (say 5, even 10px) to the cells to increase line-spacing, and you'dl have a menu that included more links and still used only half the vertical of the current roll out menu. You could even increase point size by 1, I reckon, and have no problems.
I will never see it
I will not be silenced