Site Redesign 2.1 – Okay okay you were right, y’all… it was too wide

I tightened things up a little. It should now fit better, although a small percentage of people may have to scroll sideways. Sorry – I can’t please everyone. But coming to that realization is kind of a big step for most people, eh?

Anyway, you may notice that I now have just one image up there on the top now instead of the 13 that used to rotate. I just have not had the time to re-format all the title pics for this new widescreen-busting resolution. But I do like that one above of Malaysia. And yes, that is a real place. It’s Langkawi, this island archipelago that is almost too cool to be on Earth. Here is another image of those same James-Bond-Evil-Guy-Hideout at sunset.

Purple Skies of Malaysia

  • Eric

    TOO WIDE?!?

    Come on mate! Your site STILL take up my entire MacBooks screen at 1280×800.

    I love the photographs but surely you can shink it down a bit. last time I checked 54% of people still use 1024×768. You’ve instantly alienated more than half your potential readership.

    Now I’m all in favour of getting things moving, and pushing forward (we dont want to be stuck at 800×600 forever!) but one step at a time.

    I leave almost any site that requires me to scroll across to see the full page. Just as I leave any site that specifies IE.

    Go on, just shrink it down a touch for us who don’t have 30″ Cinema displays on every single computer we own.

  • It is currently at 1230 across. I know it is wider than most and also that most computers are at 1024 — but I have looked at the stats for my blog and most of MY readers are at 1280. I think this site tends to attract people with higher-end systems that like looking at bigger things that take more bandwidth. Anyway, I agree that this size is risky… but I am still gonna go for it.

  • Eric

    Okie dokie then,

    One last point of intrest is that even though i have 1280 avaliable. I cannot remember the last time I used an app that took the entire space. I know it’s a windows v. mac thing.

    Good luck with the redesign, and i cant wait to see more of your shots Keep up the great work.

  • Pingback: Site Redesign 2.1 Okay Okay you were right… at Malaysia Today and Beyond()

  • hoku

    much better!!!

  • Jan

    its great!!

  • I think that the wide format is great for images, but reading text that is that wide is very hard on the eyes. This is why newspapers and magazines print in columns, it’s not just tradition, but because people’s eyes get confused when there are too many words on a line. I think that the optimal word width is around 15-20 words per line, but I couldn’t prove that.

    If I were you I would shrink the width of your your layout and use something like thickbox to show large size images right on the site. Otherwise I’d up the font-size on your posts use a JS automatic multi-column text script

    Other than that, I love the site and I’ve been following it for a long time, however this is the only time I have felt compelled to comment. I will continue following your adventures, however I may have to switch to checking it in Net News Wire.

  • Interesting suggestion there Jeff – let me work on that.

  • let me know via e-mail if I can help at all.

  • That’s an awesome photo, btw. Looks straight out of Man With The Golden Gun. Oh, if only I had my very own midget butler…

  • Thanks! Thank you Jeff for the offer too.

  • Ugh. Again, I echo the sentiments of the one poster above. I’m at 1920 x 1200, but my browser window is often about 1050 wide. In fact, I’ve got an AppleScript that sets my browser window to 1024 x 1024 when a site resizes it against my wishes.

    Additionally, I can view your site in my feed reader, which has a much smaller window.

    Though I normally despise it when people announce they won’t be returning to a blog (usually because something’s pissed them off), in this case you’ve essentially asked for feedback, and my feedback is that I won’t be returning nearly as frequently because I hate scrolling horizontally. Reading is more difficult and I simply despise seeing a scrollbar at the bottom of my browser, even though with the shift key my vertical scroll wheel scrolls horizontally.

    Again, though most of your visitors may be at 1280, that doesn’t mean their browser window is that wide.

  • Thanks for the feedback. I’m glad it looks okay in your feed reader at least.

  • I didn’t mean it looked fine – I mean that my feed reader is not only capable of showing the feed content but the permalinked articles themselves (the web pages). With an even smaller window, it’s even tougher to read and requires even more scrolling.

  • vadpjlcqx wnpqa ofxhywi ioeyqtbg xhdjys iwkl muothzqwa

Newsletter Sign Up

The most beautiful newsletter ever!