The ability to see which threads have new posts (and how many) since the last visit: obtained by the use of flags, numbers, different colour.
With it, you can immediately see and enter the threads that have grown, and the threads that you have visited.
Without it, you are groping in the dark, wasting a lot of time.
b In the threads:
The feature of going to the last read post to continue: default.
With it, you can just enter and continue reading.
Without it you are groping in the dark, wasting a lot of time.
The ability to open all posts without changing to a special view: obtained by pressing the Show All Messages button.
With it, you can scroll easily back and forth throughout the continuous thread
Without it, you have to go back and forth between pages, breaking up the continuity, unless you change to a special view (Print preview) that is lost as soon as you post.
The ability to archive a whole thread safely from the default view (possibly overwriting an earlier version): obtained by pressing the Show All Messages button.
With it, you can just archive.
Without it, you have to change to a special view (Print preview); if you forget, you will destroy the archived thread.
The ability to answer several posts at the same time: default.
With it, you can answer several posts freely; see below.
Without it, you have to choose to label your post as an answer to the original post or one other specific post, thus declaring a limitation that rules out all generality and multiple answers.
The ability to see other posts while creating a new post: default.
With it, you can scroll back to any post to reread and/or gather quotes while writing your own, thereby easily considering and possibly answering several posts; see above.
Without it, you can only see and answer one post, unless you exit your own posting using the Back button in order to see the others, and then you lose what you have written, unless you remember to select the lot and Ctrl+C before, and Ctrl+V when you return, using the Forward button.
b 2) Loss of efficiency, beyond direct loss of functionality:
b In the forum lists:
A compact thread list enabling you to overlook a large number of threads, often covering many days.
Instead, the thread list takes up some 2.5 - 3 times as much vertical space.
b In the threads:
A compact series of posts, only stating what is necessary, and keeping the focus on the actual posts, allowing relevant information about the poster at a click or a search.
Instead, the thread is dominated by repetition/unnecessary information in larger text size and actual posts in smaller text size, making the latter the most difficult part to read, taking up far more vertical space, possibly about 1.5 times as much (based on the same size text in the actual posts).
b 3) Loss of a timeless, mature, and unfortunately unique, forum design:
As is the case with designs in any area, a timeless mature design reflects the purpose it fulfills.
The lost forum format is casual, simple, and efficient in terms of focussing on the purpose and the actual content: user to user exchange of knowledge and experience within a community. This may be compared to a workshop/brainstorm, where everyone is equal and mixes with everyone else, and may be judged by actual contribution within the current forum, and may relax by informal OT in the form of joking, banter, and the like.
The new mainstream forum format follows the present trend of distracting focus from the purpose and content and directing it towards presenting the posters themselves. This may be compared to a formal conference, where everyone is ranked and decorated with medals/badges/ribbons according to some highly doubtful criteria across all forums, and every statement is preceded by a formal introduction/announcement, all of which is highly formal OT.
After having hosts discouraging informal OT exchange in posts for years, it is strange to see the forums themselves becoming filled with highly formal OT matter.
A mature forum design would have a core part fulfilling the purpose of allowing exchange, and then it might have layers of less important matter such as poster information, etc, optional for the members.
Either the less mature mainstream forum design will eventually mature, approaching the design we have lost, or forums members will forever be doomed to waste time and effort.
Why follow the mainstream?
Or at least, why not start working for a mature forum design, to shorten the suffering?
So, your conclusion is that the world has evolved away from this old design because the entire rest of the technology world is immature and tasteless with the exception of a handful of "regular" adobe forum dwellers here. That is interesting.
"Elitism" is to be admired if it means the Pursuit of Excellence.
I would re-phrase Curt's comments to say:
Too many of the people now creating
Web Sites are unschooled, untrained, immature individuals who bought themselves a computer and throw together a mess of pottage that resembles nothing better than the children's comics which moulded their taste.
And then they got to play with Flash too.
[ WOW! Look at all the shiny buttons! KOOL! "Like!"]
This small subset of the uneducated and untalented have now discovered that the Internet provides them with an easily accessible platform to sell their substandard wares.
Only you would know whether you fit that pattern or not.
The "World" has not evolved away from Good Design at all: there is superb work being created in every part of the Globe from architecture to jewellery; from industrial machinery to book design; and in every other field of human endeavour that I can think of.
Maybe we should not go there about that link. It has issues like white on black that many of us gave up with DOS and the last link that was suggested that has a lot of strange fonts that are hard to read. In any case, it is not really applicable to the forum discussion.
But if you are still talking about my Index page, you might enjoy some of the photographs that hide behind those darkened shutters.<br /><br />Or not!<br /><br /><shrug><br /><br />However, there is a link hidden in there to a rather complex web site that I designed and created for a client that apparently is serving him rather successfully.<br /><br />And it doesn't have white type on black either.<br /><br />But "strange fonts"? How on earth have you set your Browser prefs?
It is just that I found the menu images hard to read. It is a matter of preference, but if your customer likes it then you met the need I guess. Independent of my thoughts, I don't find the example useful in the discussions about the forum layout. It is a site for folks to find info about a business and the products products, not a discussion site.
The white on black of the original link I gave up years ago and find it extremely tiring on the eyes. At least it is not some of those pale colors on black that are impossible to see.
Dave, ordinarily I would agree, but at this point many have been vilified for having no design sense, no maturity and no background to support their opinions of the new board or their qualifications to contribute to a user to user forum at all. I think that the link I provided may provide some perspective to the "discussion".
So you have advised me to not get petty. What is your advice to Ann?
>Dierk<br /><br />Perhaps you should learn how to spell someone's name, especially when it is spelled out for you in the post immediately preceeding yours, before you accuse someone of being "uneducated."<br /><br /><SHRUG>