New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Shedding the Classic Skin - Page 2

post #31 of 42

Actually, we'd like to get to one skin, if possible. So, Lars and others, if you can live with Blue & White that would be great. 

post #32 of 42

It's no surprise that the overwhelming majority uses the default skin. How many are aware there is a choice?   I wonder what would happen if someone was to test making the classic version the default?  I suspect it would be a combination of praise for the wonderful new look with a few boos but mostly indifference.  popcorn.gif

 

I am trying the default for awhile just for kicks.  Of course I can live with it, just don't prefer it.

post #33 of 42
Quote:
Originally Posted by nolo View Post

Actually, we'd like to get to one skin, if possible. So, Lars and others, if you can live with Blue & White that would be great. 



Variety is the spice of life.....

 

post #34 of 42

All the Huddler sites use the same basic page design scheme. Only EpicSki has two skins. Because it is used by a tiny fraction of all the Huddler site users, the Classic skin doesn't get the same attention as Blue & White. For this reason, we're asking the Classic users if they can make the switch. No one is forcing you to switch, just asking if you could possibly accommodate this change, so we can free up resources to work on all the other stuff that needs attention around here. 

post #35 of 42

I think I said it before but I'll repeat. I'm fine with the default skin and I have been using it for a few days now. I don't know why the classic skin changed color slightly and began a few different color scheme behaviors but since it did, I like the default skin better than the new classic skin.

post #36 of 42
Quote:
Originally Posted by Laurel Hill Crazie View Post

 I'm fine with the default skin and I have been using it for a few days now. 


April 5, 2011

 

+1.  Any chance of toning down the "white" color?

 

Think snow,

 

CP

 

post #37 of 42

I have been using the Classic, but I switched to the default a week ago.  No problem.  I kinda wish that the white was not so white.

post #38 of 42

You might try turning your brightness down on your monitor for the short term, but toning the bright white down a few shades is definitely an option. If the brightness knob does the trick, though, please let us know.  

post #39 of 42


 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Cirquerider View Post

If you use the "classic" skin to view EpicSki, I invite you to please post in this thread. We have an opportunity to make a bunch of members and Supporters happy by giving them a user-option to define the width of the column for viewing forum posts, so they won't have a problem with word wrap when they reduce the viewing window below 1024 pixels. The only hitch is, it's going to cost us the Classic skin, which is a pain to maintain for the approximately 18 people who use it.

 

.......

 

I am a user of the Classic skin as is Bob Barnes, and several of the moderators.  As I understand it, fewer than 20 members have this, so that accounts for a good percentage. 

 


 

Please advise--and please don't tell us to get both, that's not on the table.



 



Quote:
Originally Posted by nolo View Post

There's not going to be any trade-off. That was our mistake. We'll get the user option to narrow down the window or keep it wide in the next release or the one immediately following.

 

We're not taking away the Classic skin. There actually are 450 people using the Classic skin. However, we'd like to get down to one skin for EpicSki so the engineering team doesn't have to do things twice for each skin. The numbers suggest it will be easier to convince 450 people to either give the Blue & White skin a trial run, say one week (one hour is not a fair trial), and see if it's not so bad, than the converse. If the stark whiteness remains an issue, perhaps we can darken the background a few tones to where everyone on the site is reasonably happy with the one skin.


 

Hmmmm.  Am I the only one who is a bit concerned at the discrepancy in these numbers?  18 ?  450?  more than a little bit outside the limits of estimating error......   ?????

 

If the position is that huddler just want the site to be on their standard platform, just be up front about that

post #40 of 42

The first number was anecdotal and the second (450) is accurate by latest count. It's like a lot of things, you guess and then you count. Sometimes you're surprised at how far off you were. cool.gif

post #41 of 42
Quote:
Originally Posted by CharlieP View Post


April 5, 2011

 

+1.  Any chance of toning down the "white" color?

 

Think snow,

 

CP

 

 

I could also be happier with making the light blues darker.  I can barely see the thread titles next to the forum titles.  That is the reason I prefer classic.  It is a significantly more difficult for me to read the vanilla version.  Surely I'm not the only one that has some difficulty.  Will I leave if you do nothing?  Probably not, but I will certainly spend less time here as reading the forums is definitely more labor intensive for me in the vanilla format. 
 

 

post #42 of 42
Quote:
Originally Posted by nolo View Post

The first number was anecdotal and the second (450) is accurate by latest count. It's like a lot of things, you guess and then you count. Sometimes you're surprised at how far off you were. cool.gif



97.36% of all statistics cited are made up on the spot.

 

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home