A "new look" for BT3Central

[LarryG]

I'm going to buck the trend. Typesetters and composition experts know that the longer the line, the harder it is to read; and I like to run all my windows maximized.

If the 100% width is implemented as a permanent additionchange, can we keep the current style as an option, please?

[Sam Conder]

I'm going to buck the trend. Typesetters and composition experts know that the longer the line, the harder it is to read; and I like to run all my windows maximized.

If the 100% width is implemented as a permanent additionchange, can we keep the current style as an option, please?

That has entered my mind Larry, but that will make it difficult for me to take advantage of the "extra real estate" the 100% option affords me. One benefit to the 100% width is the ability to add in some cool info in the new "Articles, Reviews & Tutorials" section. However, with those widgets enabled, the fixed width version of the site goes "wonkey". I have not yet found a way to have two different versions of the "Articles, Reviews & Tutorials" section.

[4estgump]

Sam,
I'm a newbie to the sight, but i like the 100% better.

4estgump

[wardprobst]

Like the new look.
DP

[footprintsinconc]

100% wide format

hi sam,

i liked your "classic style" alot, it printed fine and all.

the "bt3 One" look is really good aswell. i think you should stick to the new width - 100%.

out of curiosity, just want to know, the new look shouldnt give trouble to anyone who views the site. with those who want to keep the old width, what is the problem when you go with the 100% width?

regards,

[LarryG]

out of curiosity, just want to know, the new look shouldnt give trouble to anyone who views the site. with those who want to keep the old width, what is the problem when you go with the 100% width?

As mentioned, I prefer to run all my windows maximized, and this makes the lines of copy extremely long and difficult to read.

Google "optimum line length" and you'll find any number of sources citing the improved readability of shorter lines (although they can be TOO short). The one other site on which I'm a regular participant also uses vBulletin, set to 100%, and it's considerably harder to read than this site in its original form.

(BTW, I disagree with the "less scrolling" comments ... you may not be scrolling as much with your mouse, vertically, but you're doing a lot more scrolling with your eyes, horizontally.)

[Stormbringer]

As mentioned, I prefer to run all my windows maximized, and this makes the lines of copy extremely long and difficult to read.

Larry,

What size monitor are you using? I'm viewing on a 19" wideview LCD and find the 100% size reasonably bearable even with the extra wideview that my monitor creates. Maybe it doesn't bother me because I'm used to seeing things this way for some time now. I guess it did take a little getting used to now that I think about it.

Click the screen shot of how I see it. Is yours worse than this?

[LarryG]

Click the screen shot of how I see it. Is yours worse than this?

I'm looking at a 19" LCD at 1280x1024 and yeah, considerably worse that that:

But hey, I certainly don't expect Sam to not do this just because of me. I'm just pointing out one of the drawbacks, FWIW, NTTAWWT, etc.

[ChrisD]

I'm in the minority with Larry: I'd take vertical scrolling over horizontal panning any day! This is actually one of the first things that I look at when reviewing Web designs from a usability perspective. I guess that's why many more books are printed in portrait format than in landscape.

Having said that, I do think this decision should be aligned with the overall direction of BT3Central. From the threads that Sam has started recently, obviously one of the goals is ease of maintenance. So if the "100%" format will make for improved maintainability, then I'm all for it.

[gettools]

I like the 100%, but it does take some getting use to. You do move the eyes a lot more side to side, but I am easy, what ever yall decide is great with me because I count it a priviledge to be associated with such a great bunch of people ( whom I have never seen ). Great web sight keep up the good work.

[Black wallnut]

I choose door number 3. I like that I now have a choice. I think it will take me some time to figure out which format I prefer.

[crokett]

I like it the new look. The other forums I am on are all full-width and a while ago I stopped wondering why BT3Central wasn't.

[MilDoc]

Well, I tried it for a day but have to agree with LarryG. Just set it back to original style. I guess it all depends on the width of your monitor and your screen settin, but with a wide screen it was just harder to read. Oh well ...

[Kristofor]

(BTW, I disagree with the "less scrolling" comments ... you may not be scrolling as much with your mouse, vertically, but you're doing a lot more scrolling with your eyes, horizontally.)

Pretty sure that if the number and size of the words remains the same, the amount of latteral eye movement will be the same for longer lines, and the amount of vertical movement will be reduced..

Take a string of text 100 inches long, if it's in one line, that's 100" of movement then 100" to get back to the start position for a total of 200".

Now spread that over 10 lines and you have... 10" for line 1, 10" return, 10" line 2, 10" return, etc. which still gives 200" of lateral movement but 10x as much vertical movement.

(I suppose the geometery says that there will be less eye movement the longer the line is, but at some point the text is too far to the side to read easily, and my whole monitor is less than 40 degrees wide in my normal viewing position)

All that said, I agree that for readability shorter lines are easier, but not enough easier (for me) that I would trade down for lower data density if given the choice.

But, really, more often than not why I want to fit as much text on the screen as possible, is because I don't want to have to put window focus back on that montor/browser as often. I'll be multi-tasking for something that needs periodic input at the same time as I'm reading a web page and don't want to have to switch from one to another.

[Sam Conder]

Allrighty... Give "BT3Central - Compromise width" a shot...