Redesign of the www.rockbox.org front page

[bluebrother]

This is where you're wrong. Web pages shouldn't be designed for a specific resolution *at all*

I agree. What I wrote wasn't my opinion how pages should be designed, but an observation how they are. We can convincing each other, if page should have static or flexible width, but that is not a point. I just wanted to explain why I used fixed width.

Well, why aren't you using a flexible layout then?

In general, I *really* disagree with this page-needs-to-be-flashy stuff. I'd rather have a less noisy but still nice page which holds all important stuff. Why is JavaScript needed to display such a page at all? Why do hidden parts need to animate when showing up? (btw, try that on a slow machine or a box with slow graphics. You'll hate it immediately!) I'm all for a nicer look, but "nice" is something quite different to "noisy".

[psycho_maniac]

i hate flash and java too as i used to have a slow machine and couldnt even go on my favorite sites because of the java and flash. i noticed all ads now a days are java or flash and now every site is too.

[GodEater]

This post seems to be getting derailed from what I assumed was it's original purpose.

I thought we agreed somewhere along the way to keep a seperate "dev" section for all the information the rockbox regulars like to read and keep up to date on.

We're talking about a page here for either the average end user or a new visitor that's never seen rockbox before.

You lot (everyone with a rockbox badge of some kind) can spout your ideologies of what you believe is the "right and correct" way to design a web page as much as you like, but you're NOT the target audience here. Or did I get this completely wrong, and really we're just trying to keep the same page as we've always had ?

[cool_walking_]

Why does being a Rockbox regular discount people's opinions on general things like "fixed-width vs fluid" and "scripting-heavy pages"?  You also have a badge, so what makes you think new users' views don't align with those spouted ideologies?

[GodEater]

Why does being a Rockbox regular discount people's opinions on general things like "fixed-width vs fluid" and "scripting-heavy pages"?  You also have a badge, so what makes you think new users' views don't align with those spouted ideologies?

It doesn't discount their opinions, but most of the arguments from those who are regulars seem to be floating around the idea "I want the new page to be the same as the old one, except different" - which seems pointless. If that's the case, why bother redesigning it in the first place? And why bother having the "dev" centric one that was floated earlier in the thread at all ?

I'm not going to get into the argument over scripting-heavy vs. scripting light - that doesn't appear to be what the disagreements here are about - baring a few comments about not liking the fade ins of the player images. Fine - if we don't like those that's a dead easy one to remove, and I don't think it affects the page one way or the other.

As for fixed-width vs. fluid - well it's an ideal yes. But macku already said he's not keen to try it, and I don't see anyone else stepping up to the plate. So if that's a show stopper then we've wasted his time - a considerable amount of it. I would feel like a complete tool to say to the first person who's taking a serious swing at this "sorry, close but no cigar". As I said way back in this thread we can work on the page over time - it's not static. If someone really wants to redo this layout to make it work in a fluid way then by all means do it. But don't complain about it not doing it and then fail to fix it yourself.

And no, I'm no more qualified to speak for the average end user than anyone else here - this is all just my opinion. Unfortunately there are no "new users" commenting here - they can't - or else they're not new users. And the "average" users who have been in can only really say "I like this, or I don't" since by definition they're not technical enough to follow a discussion on how difficult it is to make a web page truly cross browser compatible and screen resolution independent. I've yet to see a web page that *is* all of those things that doesn't look like a car crash - but again, that's just my opinion.

Everything I've seen macku produce in this thread just looks "right" to me for a consumer friendly web page. Please feel free to discuss further though.


PS - I see this becoming at least one of the topics at devcon. I look forward to the opportunity to get red faced and shouty about it in person

[gevaerts]

As a point of information, the new site currently doesn't handle big windows well either, due to (as far as I can see) exactly the same bit of page : the "header" bit.

I'll have a go at improving this tonight, if someone can point me to a download location

[macku]

1. Static width
preview
source files archive

2. Flexible width
preview
source files archive
Svn on bottom, announcements slider not working.
Have fun.

[Hillshum]

For those who really can't handle scripting, we could always keep what we have now at old.rockbox.org or something right?

Edit: Though as it stands now, I think we should just make it work when scripting is disabled.

[psycho_maniac]

Couldnt we have the Subversion above Announcments, About Rockbox, and Support?

[GodEater]

Couldn't we just have them in the dev section and not on the home page at all ?

[Hillshum]

Yes, but svn shows how active the project is (a total noob won't know what it means, but many will)

[gevaerts]

I tweaked the css from package_flexible.zip a bit, and it now handles resizing a bit better, at least on firefox 3 (not tested on anything else yet)

Remaining problems are:
- the supported player list. I suspect that it is possible to fix this in css, but maybe doing it in javascript is easier (a bit of DOM manipulation to put the list of players fully after the list of manufacturers)
- the announcement block  (actually I suspect that the current fixed-layouting will also cause problems with announcements that are too long).
- the sponsors. Is there a reason for loading these from an image strip instead of separate images? It works, but this makes the page markup hard to understand for beginners...

I'm not sure how to solve those, partially because I don't know javascript and because my css knowledge isn't too advanced.

[motionman95]

Maybe I'm just being weird, but for some reason the new rockbox page seems...I don't know, cluttered? It seems like to much is jammed packed together. I like the simplicity of the current website, although I agree that it could use some graphical enhancements.

[DancemasterGlenn]

Yes, but svn shows how active the project is (a total noob won't know what it means, but many will)

Won't the big changes that "total noobs" will be most concerned with be featured in the "announcements" section, which is quite prominent in this mockup?

I love the svn changes, It's actually the section I have bookmarked currently, but this is because I'm now used to downloading current builds, and know the potential risks of downloading something with unfinished changes. Even if it wasn't what I have bookmarked, subversion is just a click away on the mockup. If we're really worried that people won't know where to find it, we could always change the link from "subversion" (which makes sense to a coder, but possibly not to a "noob") to something more specific ("recent changes", or something). Not something I would actually change, but that's partly because I know what subversion is.

And for what it's worth, I appreciate the fixed width on my widescreen monitor, but I do know it's not everyone else's cup of tea. I usually run my browser not fullscreened anyway, so it's not a huge issue either way.

[saratoga]

Couldn't we just have them in the dev section and not on the home page at all ?

I don't like that idea at all.  We should have an SVN summary on the front page.  It makes our code look accessible to prospective developers and keeps the community informed of who is working on what much more effectively then a once or twice a month major changes update.  The last thing we want to do is make development less front and center, particularly to new developers unfamiliar with our work.