What do you think about the new look of Joel on Software?
I'm a huge proponent of clean, simple design, so I absolutely love the new look. One properly placed image is really all a good website needs...
Sorry! There was an error: The attribute "allowDirectoryListings" must be true.
I like the new look but think I may have spotted a incorrect link, or maybe not? On the 'Whats going on here page' there is a link the discussion group, but it goes to the CityDesk discussion group, not the Joel On Software board.
Great new look. Amazing what can be acheived by using just plain old HTML.
s k rao
Ben, you're right! Fixed.
Whoops. If you're getting the "allow directory listings" error on "new.joelonsoftware.com", that's my fault. It will go away and you'll get the new site as soon as DNS gets updated, within a day or two. (In the meantime www.joelonsoftware.com will point to the old page).
This isn't really related to the new look, but I guess to every CityDesk-generated site: what's up with those funky fogXXXXXXXXXX URL's? There's no way I can tell one of those to a friend over the phone, or from memory.
Nice look. The FOG URLs are tough to remember but I can barely remember the easy ones anyway.
I put the two side-by-side. I am ignoring the visual improvements, because you could for the most part have made the two sites look identical. (But the new look is elegant.)
"Porting Joel on Software to CityDesk involved a lot of manual copying-and-pasting -- something I never would have had the patience for if it wasn't for the opportunity to thoroughly test CityDesk."
I really like the new look. When I stopped by this morning the teaser was still in place to look at the new site. The look is clean and elegant. The only thing I miss is the favorite articles that were listed in the left nagivation bar. I went to the archives and the articles were there, but not in the favorites listing. I have pointed many folk to those favorite articles and they have been helpful discussion starters.
Thomas Vander Wal
I have to say that the little running waiter in the top right corner of each article confused me for a minute.
I like the new look.
I like the look, but am wondering if you will be creating an RSS or RSS-like feed for the new site.
What new look? It's basically the same! If you had switched to a black background with purple text, added a couple of animated skulls and a "Penis enlargement now!" banner I would have called it a new look! However, the new organization of the archive is great and even if the site still looks and feel like the "old" one, it's still a good, clean and simple design, which I think is what you stand for in the first place. Keep up the good work!!
Yeah, I can create an RSS feed pretty easily and it's on my list.
So, what's the good way to print an article so that the text is wider than three inches (i know, killing trees and all that). In the old days of the web, I would just print the frame that holds the article, and thus ignore all of the sidebar stuff. But now the best way to get a "printable" article here is to view the source, remove the junk, save it off as a new HTML, then open that file up and print it.
I'm not a programmer, I'm a hack: monkey see, monkey do. Do you paste each new article into the teaser or have you created a variable that accomplishes this in CityDesk?
Nice! Very clean design without being cluttered with text and an annoying variance of color. I like the "What's Going On Here" link prominence, too.
Any chance you could add the days of the week to the blog posting headers? It would make it easier to tell at a glance whether you've blogged anything recently. Picky? But of course. I'm a user.
Nice. Clean and uncluttered with no 'arty' 3pt fonts.
When I am asked "what do you think of the new look" I do "view source". Basically, the HTML looks nice and tidy but there are some flows and glitches. (It's not clear what was cut and pasted from the old site, only the text or the complete HTML code.) Creating an application that doesn't crash AND produces the pages the way you want them to look is hard enought, but good HTML and standards complience is the next step.
Found a broken link on http://www.joelonsoftware.com/uibook/chapters/fog0000000057.html.
By the way, if you have a unix shell available, a simple way to check whether your HTML code is valid is the following:
Penis enlargement with medical device,without surgery have money back guarrantee . Authorized by the Health Autorities. Recommendeted by urologists. Permanent penis enlargement results. Tested by scientific studies.
http://www.andromedical.com http://www.sexandro.com http://www.andromedical.com/index.html
Fog Creek Home