Slashdot Mirror

The typeface isn't the problem. In fact, I rather like it. It is a well-designed typeface, very readable, and appropriate for playful images - projects like children's books, comic books, children's toys and clothing, and the like. You know. its intended purpose.

The problem is, the typeface (a "typeface" is an outline/shape - it's not a "font" until it has size and weight, kerning, etc. attributed to it) has become used for things where it is completely inappropriate: the main text in "professional"[sic] web sites, books, official documents, advertisements, and so forth.

I use the typeface on occasion - but only where it's appropriate. In nearly every case where I see Comic Sans used, Helvetica or Arial or even Verdana would be far more appropriate. I won't stop using the Comic Sans typeface where it is appropriate (dialog for comic/clip art/line art images/strips, for example) but I have never nor would I ever plaster it all over the place.

No one typeface is intended to be used for all circumstances. The type of user who would use Comic Sans in a professional document is the same kind of "designer"[sic] who would mix typefaces from four or five (or more) different font families in a single document; you know, as if they were creating examples of how NOT to use typefaces.

Just as with guns, the problem isn't fonts; the problem is people.

Oh, and you're curious about my nit-picking about "font" vs. "typeface?" I'm not in the wrong here. See:

http://www.webopedia.com/quick_ref/fonts.asp
http://www.aiga.org/content.cfm/theyre-not-fonts
http://desktoppub.about.com/b/2005/05/02/2-minute-tutorial-font-vs-typeface.htm
http://www.publish.com/c/a/Graphics-Tools/Font-vs-typeface/
http://fontfeed.com/archives/font-or-typeface/

I don't really think it's possible to quantify "usability"

Pfeiffer Consulting (and about a billion others) disagree. http://www.publish.com/c/a/Opinions/User-Interface-Friction-Its-What-Makes-You-Hate-Computers/ Furthermore, being "similar" to Microsoft is a bit of flaw in logic because the "Microsoft Way" is often considered by many as one of the biggest offenders to sensible UI. Granted, a lot of things just take over as "the way", such as clutch on the left, gas on the right and brake in the middle. Maybe there's a better way to design car pedals, but it would be catastrophic to change it now. Fortunately, in the computing world, it is relatively safe to offer UI improvements that stray from the Microsoft Way.

coincidental, not necessarily causal...the entire Nasdaq/Dow, as well as Europe and Japan, have been plunging for the last week.

I dunno, Creative seems to have dropped 2.6% when the straight time's index fell only 0.3%.

Apple was certainly traded a good deal more then usual and it's share price seems to have dropped 4.3% against the nasdaq's 2.4%.

I'd say it's definitely more the coincidence - patents do hurt the market.

I'm sorry, but I can't throw any support behind this endeavour at all. After all, I think it's time to go back and look at what was just said:

Hey guys! I'm more than willing to let you redesign this place. Oh, keep that shitty logotype, and that "Slashdot Green", and the crappily-compressed icons of yesteryear. Actually, what we want is you to just change things minimally, and we want to do as little work on the Slashcode backend (and information architecture) as possible.

The point you guys are missing here is twofold: first, a redesign is more than just skin-deep; second, it's hard to even get to the skin-deep side of things when you're stifling creativity to the point of where the only thing you want to see is exactly what you've got now. Just go do a find/replace and change section heads to Helvetica and body copy to Georgia, space out your line-height a bit more, and voila! instant Slashdot "redesign". I wouldn't even call it much of a facelift.

You guys are trying to compete with places that are obviously out of your league from a UI perspective at that. As my friend Stick_Fig said above, Digg works because it's drastically cleaner on the frontend, and the only way to get that cleanliness on Slashdot in a CSS change would be to add a ton of display: none; to the code. This offers no benefit in decreasing load time to the user and just makes the site that more frivolous.

You've already lost some part of your readerbase to sites like Digg (which is a forbidden term around these parts) and quick-access links lists like del.icio.us popular. Asking for a facelift isn't helping your cause.

Anyway, let's get to that point: Changing a CSS file is not a "redesign". Saying so is just fooling yourself. A true redesign would take into account plenty of information architecture, markup optimisation, and a total re-thinking of Slashcode's interface. It's not enough to simply change green to blue and underline your links with dotted borders. A redesign requires changes to the markup both for semantics/accessibility as well as to maintain a coherent architecture across the redesign. A redesign requires thinking outside of the box on comment layout, administrative interface, and site structure.

You should be allowing designers and developers to tweak Slashcode itself as well as the template's markup. This readerbase is more than talented enough to do so. Once the aging Slashcode dinosaur is brought into check and architecture has been optimised, things can move along smoothly on the CSS end of things. And no, that HTML/CSS thing that you guys did a few months back (that CmdrTaco is saying was so snazzy) really doesn't change much of anything. Changing markup and not changing any internal IA structure is useless, and this contest is exactly what designer Khoi Vinh complained about in October.

Slashdot, you're pretty much keeping yourself right on the same track. This is just as short-sighted as the original concept was, and I don't see anything changing drastically here in the near future. From the article on Publish.com:

Without the freedom to rethink, for instance, Slashdot's comment threading, or its presentation of search results, or its topic pages, the net effect of a redesign will be considerably less impactful than one might hope for: prettier but not sturdier. This is because the linchpin of effective online graphic design--a mindful awareness of architecture and usability--will be hampered by the existing code. There may very well be new improvements to these architectural challenges in development, but even the best design based on today's feature set will have difficulty adapting to significant future changes in the user experience. Like a lot of facelifts, this one may be pleasing at first glance, but will likely prove somehow unsatisfactory afte

Digg The Slashdot Killer

Digg Might Just Bury Slashdot

Slashdot, Digg.com, and the True Meaning of Design

My Slashdot Replacement

Goodbye, Slashdot, Hello Digg

http://www.alexa.com/data/details/traffic_detail s?&range=1y&size= large&compare_sites=slashdot.org&y=t&url=digg.com

How Digg Uncovers The News

Why Slashdot Will Die

See what others are saying...

Digg is actually better. Slashdot is old and ugly. Its content is decided by editors, the layout looks like it was made in windows95's heyday and its a dinosaur. Digg on the other hand is new and "growing", they use a flashier, better looking layout, yet the site is still simpler then Slashdot. The content is decided by the submitters and you can get that content via audio and video podcasts.

I never could stand slashdot. The layout and just overall feel of that site was/is bad.

I don't like slashdot's layout. It's ugly and cluttered. The colors make me wanna puke.

Slashdot users agree that Digg.com's entries are a lot more current that the ones posted at Slashdot.

99% of slashdot users have self-diagnosed themselves as suffering from Asperger's Syndrome. Most slashdot users consider themselves "smart" when in fact they are simply of average intelligence, but have more free time and a higher sense of ego. This can be seen in the forums where spelling and usage errors are prevalent in condescending, arrogant rants, identified by containing the phrase "people are stupid" at some point in the post.

I prefer Digg for my tech news and I've found some really nice sites that way.

I prefer Digg. I used to check /. but I didn't like it as much

I like Digg better anyway, much more and more interesting news.

What I can't stand, even less that the site and the proseltyzing editors, are Slashdot's users- overweight, effeminate cubicle shit. At least I don't have to wear a goatee and suck linux dick to participate on Digg I cant stand Slashdot, I will only Read it when its linked from somewhere else

Learn More

Digg The Slashdot Killer

Digg Might Just Bury Slashdot

Slashdot, Digg.com, and the True Meaning of Design

My Slashdot Replacement

Goodbye, Slashdot, Hello Digg

http://www.alexa.com/data/details/traffic_detail s?&range=1y&size= large&compare_sites=slashdot.org&y=t&url=digg.com

How Digg Uncovers The News

Why Slashdot Will Die

See what others are saying...

Digg is actually better. Slashdot is old and ugly. Its content is decided by editors, the layout looks like it was made in windows95's heyday and its a dinosaur. Digg on the other hand is new and "growing", they use a flashier, better looking layout, yet the site is still simpler then Slashdot. The content is decided by the submitters and you can get that content via audio and video podcasts.

I never could stand slashdot. The layout and just overall feel of that site was/is bad.

I don't like slashdot's layout. It's ugly and cluttered. The colors make me wanna puke.

Slashdot users agree that Digg.com's entries are a lot more current that the ones posted at Slashdot.

99% of slashdot users have self-diagnosed themselves as suffering from Asperger's Syndrome. Most slashdot users consider themselves "smart" when in fact they are simply of average intelligence, but have more free time and a higher sense of ego. This can be seen in the forums where spelling and usage errors are prevalent in condescending, arrogant rants, identified by containing the phrase "people are stupid" at some point in the post.

I prefer Digg for my tech news and I've found some really nice sites that way.

I prefer Digg. I used to check /. but I didn't like it as much

I like Digg better anyway, much more and more interesting news.

I cant stand Slashdot, I will only Read it when its linked from somewhere else

Learn More

I'm the editor at Publish.com. I hope this gets moderated up, because some things need to be rectified.

First up, the article was my idea, and I asked Khoi to write it. I spoke to him when we did an article on the Onion's redesign, and he agreed to do a piece on the upcoming slashdot redesign, which was then a current post on these boards. Please don't think that Khoi doesn't have better things to do than think about ways to change Slashdot. He's a busy guy with a great business. He's also a great designer. Just check out his design at subtraction.com, and the portfolio at behavior. Khoi has been instrumental in educating the CSS and design community about grid design recently, among other things.

Second, Khoi is a very considerate and thoughtful person. He didn't write the headline and deck, my copy desk did. Khoi then emailed me and asked me if we could change it, because it was more inflammatory than he meant. We complied with his (very reasonable) request.

Third, I agree with Khoi's editorial. I think there are many many things that could be done to improve slashdot. (And while we're busy critiquing site designs, would somebody please redesign publish.com for me? It's hideous.) There's certainly nothing wrong with looking into the possibilities. If I could add anything to that discussion, I would say that, in order to keep the focus on the community here, any redesign or redesign contest should be open first only to slashdot members, and then to the greater Web community.

Finally, I really dig the onion's redesign. I think it leverages the onion's emphasis on parody by mimicking the layout of a small-town newspaper Web site. You can check out our article on the redesign here: http://www.publish.com/article2/0,1759,1859658,00. asp So there's that. Thanks for reading. Thanks, Steve Bryant Editor, Publish.com

I just read here that the second beta of IE 7 is where MS will roll in CSS 2 support. But I'm also confused as to why they're not targeting CSS 2.1, which "rolls back" some CSS 2 elements that no-one was following anyway.

From the publish.com article:

Kartes went on to attack the company's critics. Doesn't this all boil down to open-source people thinking they have the right to break laws by violating patent rights, but when developers use legal code, open-source people think they have the right to make their own laws. I've never quite understood this concept of open source and exactly where it came from," he said.

Evidently not.

600,000 JOBS FOR THE TAKING (Source: Publish.com) Despite corporate layoffs, employers confront a shortfall of technology workers. What's this about?

This article discusses more about the research on how Napster helps recording industry sales, and could be even more helpful if the industry folks would use their heads a little...