NationStates Jolt Archive

Remember these threads some weeks ago about jolt going ugly? Unreadable fonts and all... We were not amused.

Now that general looks ok again, I just succumbed to the constant nagging of my Firefox to install the upgrade. And boy, does it look ugly. (No, when entering an URL, I do not need a 60-pixel-per-URL description for every possible URL I might be typing in, with freakin' different font sizes!)

So... what do you think? I personally Prefer Change Not To Happen. Unless it's an improvement, that is... and has any other victim of this upgrade figured out how to get the old-style browsing history, in a sidetab and grouped by days?

Spoiler: I just found out, you'll have to go to a submenu called 'sidebar' first. Userfriendly, eh?

Did you upgrade from 3 to 3.1 or from 2?

Did you upgrade from 3 to 3.1 or from 2?

Well, uhm... ok, how am I supposed to find out? I can't remember... did 3.0 already have these strange-looking backward/forward buttons? If so, from 2.0. Though I think I had updated only some months ago.

Well, uhm... ok, how am I supposed to find out? I can't remember... did 3.0 already have these strange-looking backward/forward buttons? If so, from 2.0. Though I think I had updated only some months ago.

You know you can download your own button theme in firefox right? :p

I had to do it for my mother who was all http://generalitemafia.ipbfree.com/uploads/ipbfree.com/generalitemafia/emo-ahhh1gv.gif "I can't figure out how to browse!" until I downloaded the old netscape theme, then she was like "oh, wow, this is familiar!"

Well, uhm... ok, how am I supposed to find out? I can't remember... did 3.0 already have these strange-looking backward/forward buttons? If so, from 2.0. Though I think I had updated only some months ago.

Well I don't use the default skin, it's fairly easy to download a more suitable one if you're not happy with the current skin.

he old netscape theme

*throws up*

*throws up*

My mother often makes me vomit too.

what's netscape?

what's netscape?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Netscape_Communications_Corporation

It's the browser the maternal used to use on AOL. Years of AOL have made her incompetent to browse the web. I got her broadband and she was confused and sad.

A lot of interfaces look ugly or awkward when you first move to them. Firefox 3.0 was the same for me at first, but I've gotten used to it.

You know you can download your own button theme in firefox right? :p
"

It's a browser. I don't usually spend time meta-browsing to make a tool usable... It should come in a way that is ready to use. And ready to look at. (At least with Windows XP, you could just click one single checkbox and the toddler-look disappeared for a normal looking OS...)

edit: Speaking of looks, it apparently also has trouble with html table layouts. Both the old version and IE could interpret the page I just visited, the new one cannot.

It's a browser. I don't usually spend time meta-browsing to make a tool usable... It should come in a way that is ready to use. And ready to look at. (At least with Windows XP, you could just click one single checkbox and the toddler-look disappeared for a normal looking OS...)
What's wrong with Firefox interface? It's pretty convenient and very simple. Including with default skin. Just a bit decorated, but enlarged < > back and forward buttons, simple reverse and stop. A bit too low-contrast, but still usable home (not that anyone uses it often anyway).

It's a browser. I don't usually spend time meta-browsing to make a tool usable... It should come in a way that is ready to use. And ready to look at. (At least with Windows XP, you could just click one single checkbox and the toddler-look disappeared for a normal looking OS...)
I customize everything. It annoys my husband.

edit: Speaking of looks, it apparently also has trouble with html table layouts. Both the old version and IE could interpret the page I just visited, the new one cannot.
Don't blame Firefox because people can't code properly.

The extra line can be useful. It's the title of the page. So instead of seeing just a url like this http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RBhcOFNFkcU I also see "YouTube - Roman Miroshnichenko plays in Djivan Gasparyan's Concert" and know exactly what is on that page.

It's very handy for finding pages, too.

For example, say I wanted to find this thread easily. All I need to do is type "first jolt" into the address bar and the URL for this page comes up.

Once you get used to it it's great.

You know you can download your own button theme in firefox right? :p

I had to do it for my mother who was all http://generalitemafia.ipbfree.com/uploads/ipbfree.com/generalitemafia/emo-ahhh1gv.gif "I can't figure out how to browse!" until I downloaded the old netscape theme, then she was like "oh, wow, this is familiar!"

*steals smilie*

Don't blame Firefox because people can't code properly.

Well, it was done with sone html tool. The code they generate tends to be rather ugly, so I can't tell if it's correct... but IF the html was wrong, it's a buggy html generator, and both the old firefox and IE just happened to interpret a wrong piece of html correctly... so I place my bet on the people not coding correctly working for the firefox team.

The extra line can be useful. It's the title of the page. So instead of seeing just a url like this http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RBhcOFNFkcU I also see "YouTube - Roman Miroshnichenko plays in Djivan Gasparyan's Concert" and know exactly what is on that page.

While that
might be handy,
why make it
look ugly?

It's very handy for finding pages, too.

For example, say I wanted to find this thread easily. All I need to do is type "first jolt" into the address bar and the URL for this page comes up.

Once you get used to it it's great.Oooh, I didn't know it did that. That's cool.

While that
might be handy,
why make it
look ugly?The text is pretty much equal in size for me, maybe the title stuff is slightly bigger. But it's in different colours which is what helps most.

While that might be handy, why make it look ugly?

It doesn't look ugly. There, that settles your silly little appeal to subjective taste.

It's very handy for finding pages, too.

For example, say I wanted to find this thread easily. All I need to do is type "first jolt" into the address bar and the URL for this page comes up.

Once you get used to it it's great.

It's pretty much one of the two only reasons I use FF, despite its bugs, memory leaks and instability.

The second is that if Firefox, kubuntu, the modem, the computer, or the power grid (but usually Firefox) crashes when typing a post, most times it's saved one way or another. An exception is when "preview" button is used or when the terminal web proxy loses the session. Still, saves a lot of computer-kicking when typing 10-15 kilobyte posts on more technical forums.

Oooh, I didn't know it did that. That's cool.

It's handy for stalking people on Facebook*. Once you've been to their page once, all you have to do to find it again quickly is type their name.


*Let's face it, that's all Facebook exists for.

but IF the html was wrong, it's a buggy html generator, and both the old firefox and IE just happened to interpret a wrong piece of html correctly... so I place my bet on the people not coding correctly working for the firefox team.

Often times browsers in the past gave buggy code more leeway and were coded to display bad code correctly. This is bad, because it doesn't punish bad coding. Firefox, and even IE in its newer version, is moving away from coddling illiterate coders.

Often times browsers in the past gave buggy code more leeway and were coded to display bad code correctly. This is bad, because it doesn't punish bad coding. Firefox, and even IE in its newer version, is moving away from coddling illiterate coders.

That's right. They should have the done this 15 years ago... Still, there are thousands of pages made like this out there, so making them not work anymore NOW is not a good idea... Also, actually old browsers (both Netscape and IE) were buggy as well, so the approach was to write correct html, and then rewrite it for the special needs of the browsers.

This kind of stopped with firefox (you don't see any 'this page made for browser XXX' anymore), partly probably because of generators that made their html bulletproof. Negating this seems... not wise. Especially because Firefox used to work very good. If I learned one thing in the software industry, it's not to touch to code that works fine.

Remember these threads some weeks ago about jolt going ugly? Unreadable fonts and all... We were not amused.

Now that general looks ok again, I just succumbed to the constant nagging of my Firefox to install the upgrade. And boy, does it look ugly.
Customise, dear, customise.

The new Firefox features are really handy, and it deals with a number of old issues (especially password storing) in a much better fashion.

It feels slightly faster, too.

Edit: I use Qute (https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/7), a simple and subtle theme.

*Let's face it, that's all Facebook exists for.

Hey, don't trivialize the ease of which you can groom your victims, while at the same time spamming your old enemies from school.

Edit: I use Qute (https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/7), a simple and subtle theme.

Ah, at least the icons look better now.

Can one also customise Dahleks? I find them hard to understand.

Can one also customise Dahleks? I find them hard to understand.
Dahleks?

Dahleks?

Daleks (the H was wrong).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Daleks_appearence.jpg

...what? Can I guy not complain about multiple things at once?

Dahleks?

Exterminate!

Daleks (the H was wrong).

Exterminate!
Oh. I sees.

There's actually a little switch on the side of each Dalek that turns their voice synthesiser from 'BBC Baddie' to 'Morgan Freeman'.

Exterminate!

Yeah. It's easy to understand this (I know that kind of mood), but sometimes they say different things and I'm confused... %-)

Oh. I sees.

There's actually a little switch on the side of each Dalek that turns their voice synthesiser from 'BBC Baddie' to 'Morgan Freeman'.

Now that's userfriendliness. Though it might make you suffer from freemanic paracusia, I guess.

The Firefox 3 "awesomebar" is anything but awesome. There's an addon that restores the firefox 2 behavior.

Now that's userfriendliness. Though it might make you suffer from freemanic paracusia, I guess.

*enjoys the reference*

The Firefox 3 "awesomebar" is anything but awesome. There's an addon that restores the firefox 2 behavior.

For my browsing use, I've found it a good deal nicer.

However, I use conkeror for my main browser. Now this is a useful program.

3.0 as a little confusing at first, but I've found it's easier to revisit topics without putting them in my favorites.

I have a list of bookmarks that's about a thousand entries long. Typing ANYTHING into the awesome bar pops up hundreds of unrelated things, with, more often than not, the thing I WANT to access nowhere to be seen. With the Firefox 2 behavior I could type "en.wiki" and all my previous wikipedia links would pop up. With Awesomebar I'd get a load shit unrelated to the wiki.

The search algorithm they use is shit for large data sets, apparently.

Also, the mammothly fat height of each entry is fucking ugly.

3.0 as a little confusing at first, but I've found it's easier to revisit topics without putting them in my favorites.Buh? You could also just click "Quick Links" in the top right and then click in "Subscribed Threads" in the resulting menu... much quicker...

Buh? You could also just click "Quick Links" in the top right and then click in "Subscribed Threads" in the resulting menu... much quicker...
1. I have too many songs in my quick links already :headbang: :tongue:

2. I've found it quicker and easier to type the first word of a topic and press two buttons to get there. (Down and enter)

I have a list of bookmarks that's about a thousand entries long. Typing ANYTHING into the awesome bar pops up hundreds of unrelated things, with, more often than not, the thing I WANT to access nowhere to be seen. With the Firefox 2 behavior I could type "en.wiki" and all my previous wikipedia links would pop up. With Awesomebar I'd get a load shit unrelated to the wiki.

The search algorithm they use is shit for large data sets, apparently.

Also, the mammothly fat height of each entry is fucking ugly.

Exactly. While the 'It also searches the title' thing seemed nice at first (other than looking ugly), I found that it somehow prefers to give me 'bugmenot: someurlwithannoyingregistrationprocess.com' to just giving me 'someurlwithannoyingregistrationprocess.com' when I type 'someurl...'. What the heck?

1. I have too many songs in my quick links already :headbang: :tongue:

2. I've found it quicker and easier to type the first word of a topic and press two buttons to get there. (Down and enter)I meant the quick links on the webpage, just below the ad banner and your username.

But then your second reason is probably true. I wouldn't know I just browse the forums looking for the subscribed thread symbol.

I prefer Konqueror!

Ah, at least the icons look better now.

Can one also customise Dahleks? I find them hard to understand.

You can not customize a Da-lek! Da-leks are already superior!

EXTERMINATE, EXTERMINATE!!!!