<For example, my monitor is set to 1024x768 and I have my table width set to 95% (although it's housed in a 95% table which effectively...>
I am trying to encourage a commitment to interface because I need it's scalability. Unlike you, I am not a hobbyist. From the moment someone arrives at my site I have only a few minutes to gain teir allegiance. I don't have the luxury of explaining to them how to re-configure their monitors. As I'm sure you know, only 50% of people are comfortable even with upgrading their browsers. How can we expect them to be willing to reconfigure their resolutions. I am seeking a mass market. To be quite frank: 200 registered users after 3 years? We seem to have different goals. And, UBBT doesn't at all market itself as Boutique Ware. Ultimately, for anyone who is unwilling or unable to have each visitor test and change their monitor res., the program ships user-combative, versus friendly.
<why don't you upload a different graphic if you're so against the folder? It's not exactly a...> Not complicated at all, and I easliy did that, long ago. My point is, that, if both of US are smart enough to do that, how is it that the software design team overlooked it? I am seeking to balance the outlook. Scalability shouldn't sacrifice design. But most importantly, you seem to have a lot more time to spend hand tooling your site. I don't have that kind of luxury, and I am quite unhappy with having to spend the little time I do have improvising design that could easily have come shipped with the product. I pointed out that the kind of interface I would want is common to both of their OWN other products. Doesn't that surprise you? If they had spent any time at all on raising the standard, imagine the time you could have saved? That's what I'm asking them to do.
And, as to UBBisation, I think there is a kind of myopia that takes over when we get involved with software design. But, sniffing, "Hmf! Anyone can SEE that they could sort the topics for views! Dunderheads!" makes the assumption that people will be willing to take the time to interpret the entirety of the table that's being presented to them. You know how fast people browse, right? Sure, the designers know right where to look. But, I need it to work for everybody. An example: when teaching some people get it verbally, some visually. No matter how clear you discousre on Plato's theory of forms, for some people, they just won't get it unless you use the blackboard. Do teachers just say, "Well, forget the guys that can't get what I'm saying."? If the teacher sketches it out on the board, are you gonna say, "Feature Bloat!"? It's the same with visitors. For some, that burning folder is all they need. I am not willing to sacrifice those visitors. Are you? What can be the attraction of excluding such a clear feature if it MAKES PEOPLE WANT TO STAY?
That same myopia seems to be gripping the UBBT group right now. Instead of shooting the messenger, why not take a few hours to identify the key features that are missing from the interface. Sit some UBB folks down and listen to what they say. UBB isn't number one for nothin'. But, take responsibility. Do something. Take a stand. Right now would be a good time to make the commitment to raising the standard of the interface. Just look at Wraith, whose stinging indictment of me still includes the fact that he has the light bulbs. What does that tell you? By choosing not to take a stand, you would only indicate that your customer's time and market penetration are secondary to the self-involved delight you seem to get from adding ever subtle refinements while openly disdaining the interface. You need to shake that off and realize that the program only succeeds if visitors are able to use it easily. I'll be watching the Changelog for v6.
[This message was edited by mdmz on 06 Feb 02 at 05:56 PM.]
