Babble v1 144

babble-digest Sunday, January 18 1998 Volume 01 : Number 144

In this issue:
Re: Webmonkey network... hmm.
Re: Webmonkey network... hmm.
Re: that javascript back button
Re: Webmonkey network... hmm.
was h5 bashing/critique

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Sat, 17 Jan 1998 17:54:16 -0700
From: Nathan Perry <perry@theshop.com>
Subject: Re: Webmonkey network... hmm.

now, there's a touch a cockiness...

At 12:46 PM 1/17/98 -0500, Ryan Ferguson wrote:
>Well, I don't know about this whole Webmonkey integration - I happen to
>think that Webmonkey is one of the bright spots on the web - but the new H5
>site design leaves a lot to be desired.
>
>If I'm speaking out of place, and I probably am, forgive my arrogance, but
>shouldn't H5 "practice what it preaches?" I've always read H5's reviews
>and profiles - they're pretty interesting - but what with the high-handed
>attitude that H5 reviewers take, you'd think they'd be a little more
>careful about typos and problems with H5 site itself (what's with that
>frame on the left? Unless you're at 1024 or higher resolution, you can't
>see all the menu options!)
>
>Of course, if anyone pokes into the back issues a bit, it's easy to see why
>H5 was redesigned. The old site design was, well, embarassing, for lack of
>better words - looked like a design freshman was at the helm!
>
>I suppose what I'm getting at is that H5 can be tiring after awhile. You
>can only take so much hypocrisy and, well, crap. Call me jaded, call me
>wrong - just call me hopeful that the Wired folks can whip this old dog
>into shape. Anyway, the original point of this rather long-winded post was
>that the new Webmonkey header at the top makes reading reviews and profiles
>really, really, difficult. Talk about cramped! I'd love to read an
>H5-style review of the H5 site. (Snicker.)
>
>Okay, back to your regular discussion. Sorry for sarcasm.
>
>
>Ryan Ferguson
>signacct@signweb.com
>

..H5 Babble Design List Info: http://www.highfive.com/h5/babble.html
..To unsubscribe, send the following one line to majordomo@highfive.com:
.."unsubscribe (babble or babble-digest) (e-mail address)"

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 17 Jan 1998 22:02:43 -0500
From: Porter Glendinning <pglendinning@cen.com>
Subject: Re: Webmonkey network... hmm.

At 12:46 PM 1/17/98 -0500, Ryan Ferguson wrote:
[snip]
>Unless you're at 1024 or higher resolution, you can't
>see all the menu options!)

Yes, this has bothered me, too. I know a scroll bar would look pretty bad
sitting in the middle of the page, but look at the alternative . . .

>Of course, if anyone pokes into the back issues a bit, it's easy to see why
>H5 was redesigned. The old site design was, well, embarassing, for lack of
>better words - looked like a design freshman was at the helm!

I'm guessing you're talking about the good old days with the blue starfield
background. You have to look at that design in context. At the time, It was
pretty revolutionary to use a background so wide it only tiled vertically
in the window. Using tables to constrain column width was a pretty cool
hack back then, too. Geez . . . that was only a couple years ago. Ancient
history! Thankfully, they have since updated the look. That's the beauty of
the Web.

[snip]
Anyway, the original point of this rather long-winded post was
>that the new Webmonkey header at the top makes reading reviews and profiles
>really, really, difficult. Talk about cramped! I'd love to read an
>H5-style review of the H5 site. (Snicker.)
[snip]

Actually I didn't know this had happened until I heard about it on the
list. For the longest time I've had the H5 core page bookmarked and just
use that to stop in. The cool thing is: that page doesn't include the
Webmonkey header frame, but it does have all the other frames.

I would suggest using this URL if the banner ads and excess chrome bug you
as much as they do me:
http://www.highfive.com/core/
(I hesitate to post this to the group for fear that it will be taken away.)

- - Porter

- -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Porter Glendinning pglendinning@cen.com
WWW Developer http://www.serve.com/apg/

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 17 Jan 1998 22:24:54 -0500
From: Ryan Ferguson <signacct@signweb.com>
Subject: Re: that javascript back button

>How steep is the learning curve for PHP?

It's not bad at all, but it does require that you run Apache and, if you
don't already have PHP, recompile Apache to include PHP.

If you can pick up Perl, PHP/FI is a snap. There's not a lot of info on
the language at present, but it's definitely catching on in a big way. I
guess the closest thing to a "resource center" out there is php.iquest.net.

Ryan Ferguson
www.webworkx.com

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 19 Jan 1998 01:30:19 -0800
From: Ryan Ferguson <signacct@signweb.com>
Subject: Re: Webmonkey network... hmm.

Porter took a puff on a cigar, kicked back, and said:

>I'm guessing you're talking about the good old days with the blue starfield
>background. You have to look at that design in context. At the time, It was
>pretty revolutionary to use a background so wide it only tiled vertically
>in the window. Using tables to constrain column width was a pretty cool
>hack back then, too. Geez . . . that was only a couple years ago. Ancient
>history! Thankfully, they have since updated the look. That's the beauty of
>the Web.

Well... perhaps. Even before that site came about - I call it the Great
Big Blue Ugliness... Adjacency was building sites like Patagonia and Land
Rover. Patagonia has just undergone a serious underhaul, and it's great,
but the old site was awesome and *it didn't even use tables!* Now _that_
is great design. Being forced to center everything and design around the
limitations to build a site that looks good to this day (or rather, to the
day the site was re-designed) is a serious accomplishment.

But, I digress. Will H5 get its act together? I think so - there are
always us designers to give them a kick in the ass when they really need
it. :)

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 18 Jan 1998 00:30:43 -0800 (PST)
From: Matt Newell <matt@ns.qnis.net>
Subject: was h5 bashing/critique

i understand you guys like h5 for a resource of information and the like,
but the amount of conversation on this issue might best be not forwarded
to whole list.. please dont flame me if im in the minority with this, but
shooting replies every 15 minutes is filling up my box, even though its a
mailing list, maybe keeping replies that turn to conversations between
yourselves would be a better approach for all of us.

it seems to me that a *lot* of time/effort has been placed on what h5
should and should not do. and it kind of worries me that there is no other
influence to talk about ...

sigh. again. please just think twice about sending responses to the list
that start to veer from the inital topic and stray toward
obscurity/conversations.

please forward all flames to me and not the list if there is a difference
of opinion, and that these flames will be filtered by me to dev/null.

-- jEsTeR

www.sweetillusions.org
== ================================= === ==
jester@sweetillusions.org
== ================================= === ==
whatever is not nailed down is mine;
what i can pry loose, is not nailed down

On Mon, 19 Jan 1998, Ryan Ferguson wrote:

> Porter took a puff on a cigar, kicked back, and said:
>
> >I'm guessing you're talking about the good old days with the blue starfield
> >background. You have to look at that design in context. At the time, It was
> >pretty revolutionary to use a background so wide it only tiled vertically
> >in the window. Using tables to constrain column width was a pretty cool
> >hack back then, too. Geez . . . that was only a couple years ago. Ancient
> >history! Thankfully, they have since updated the look. That's the beauty of
> >the Web.
>
> Well... perhaps. Even before that site came about - I call it the Great
> Big Blue Ugliness... Adjacency was building sites like Patagonia and Land
> Rover. Patagonia has just undergone a serious underhaul, and it's great,
> but the old site was awesome and *it didn't even use tables!* Now _that_
> is great design. Being forced to center everything and design around the
> limitations to build a site that looks good to this day (or rather, to the
> day the site was re-designed) is a serious accomplishment.
>
> But, I digress. Will H5 get its act together? I think so - there are
> always us designers to give them a kick in the ass when they really need
> it. :)
>
>
> ..H5 Babble Design List Info: http://www.highfive.com/h5/babble.html
> ..To unsubscribe, send the following one line to majordomo@highfive.com:
> ."unsubscribe (babble or babble-digest) (e-mail address)"
>

------------------------------

End of babble-digest V1 #144
****************************

Previous | ToC | Next