HOME > Chowhound > Site Talk >

Discussion

New Chowhound Design is Now Live!

LOCKED DISCUSSION

We’re pleased to announce a new design for Chowhound board and thread pages, the first of a series of changes that will be released in the upcoming months. To learn more about the design and functionality, take a look at this video: http://www.chow.com/food-news/131157

Here’s a bit of background about why we are redesigning the look of the site:

This is the biggest change to the look of the site since Chowhound (re)launched in 2006! It is absolutely a necessity for us to evolve and modernize the look of Chowhound to compete in today’s food-obsessed web environment. To keep the site going strong, change is needed.

The design that you are seeing is the product of 6 months of work and planning. We’ve conducted user testing with both casual and long-term users and have come up with a design that we believe works for mobile as well as desktop users. We’re proud of what we’ve accomplished.

In the past year, we have seen dramatic increases in our mobile traffic. Our new design addresses the needs of these users, while maintaining the functionality that desktop users rely upon. The design you are currently seeing is a living thing. We will be changing the site repeatedly in the months ahead based on how people are using the site.

We’ve tested the site extensively before this release, but there may be things that we missed. If you notice bugs, please report them on Site Talk. The best strategy is to start a new discussion about the particular bug, which will ensure that our Engineering team sees it and addresses the problem. For more information on how to report bugs and technical problems, see: http://chowhound.chow.com/topics/877664

If you have feedback about the new design, it’s helpful to be as specific as possible and bear in mind that we are working to address the needs of many different types of users. Thank you for your commitment to the site, and for taking part in the ongoing process of improving it,

Dave MP on behalf of the CHOW Product Team

    1. re: pikawicca

      I admire your starting gun, pikawicca.

      1. re: HillJ

        Well, I stuck my neck out, and I believe it got cut off. Ouch!

        1. re: pikawicca

          When the dust settles around here the only thing anyone will remember is what was fixed on request and what stayed re the latest redesign. You enjoy CH long enough you see the passionate replies to every change; big and small. The staff has pretty big shoulders and changes have already been made as reported by Meredith, Dave and Jacq. I can't think of another website that asks and takes feedback nearly as well, listens to members vent, point figures and make assumption and at the end of the day admits mistake and demonstrates corrections.

          Sticking your neck out with a positive reply still stands out in a "room" full of well intended discontent. Don't ever stop!

          1. re: HillJ

            Hey, HillJ: "...and at the end of the day admits mistake..."

            I missed that part. That would be a first. Please link me up?

            This change was the proverbial fart in church, and as with many things here, it takes a mutiny to get a nod toward correction, and even then there's never an admission of error. Stiff upper lip and all of that--they're meat and we're offal.

            Aloha,
            Kaleo

            1. re: kaleokahu

              Hey, Kaleo. If you believe less than 500 comments (forgive me I didn't count how many people that actually amounts to) in a community of 2 million is mutiny, we're riding two different ships. Given the relatively small # of participants in this thread sharing feedback, yes! I believe the reply from the staff has been swift and encouraging. Has it been 24 hours yet since the redesign launch?

              1. re: HillJ

                Hi, HillJ:

                I would call 500+, 95% strongly negative posts on Site Talk in two days a mutiny, absolutely yes. Nothing has ever lit up this board like this, and in virtual unanimity. If the topic were allowed across all Boards (oops, Categories), there'd be fleets of mutineers.

                Re: the "reply from the staff"... Where's the "admission of error" you refer to?

                If CBS wanted to waste its money and 6 months of staff/consultants' playtime changing the site for the worse and driving away the core of CH contributors, that's its business. I don't think that was the intent, but if it was, it's wildly successful.

                Aloha,
                Kaleo

                1. re: kaleokahu

                  500 plus comments is not 500 plus people. Mutiny is a strong colorful word but I'm not buying it. The folks working behind the scenes are addressing the feedback provided.

                  Beyond that I'm not fond of unnecessary roughness to make a point.

                  As of this morning I'm enjoying the change in color for previously read comments against new comments making it easier to read threads. The edit button works.

                  CH is on the move!
                  http://chowhound.chow.com/topics/881622
                  Meredith is addressing changes made due to member feedback here.

                  1. re: HillJ

                    Hi, HillJ:

                    Well, as past issues have proven, a little roughness has been not only necessary, but also a sufficient cause to get staff to change course. We see that at work in this very thread.

                    Consider how few people actually come to Site Talk--as one poster said, in paraphrase: "It has to be really bad for me to come to Site Talk." Compared with the pleasure of hanging on the substantive Boards, Site Talk is like a visit to the dentist. Yet many, many have come here for the CH equivalent of a root canal--to express their strong displeasure at what really is a step backward.

                    "500 plus comments is not 500 plus people." It will be by later today, I think. And my experience tells me the posters-to-posts ratio on this thread is quite high.

                    Like Diogenes, I'll go looking for that admission of error myself...

                    Aloha,
                    Kaleo

                    1. re: kaleokahu

                      Like Diogenes, I'll go looking for that admission of error myself...

                      Please do. Admissions are there with some willingness to read them as intended. But come on now, encouraging mutiny, retrieving the gangplank from the back of the ship..that's on you K. So unnecessary.

                      1. re: HillJ

                        Hi, HillJ:

                        Been looking, but can't find anything like: "Hmm, maybe not that great an idea." Or like: "We coulda done better, sorry" or "We shoulda tested it more with real users." Or even like: "We're changing the orientation of the site to favor mobile and tablet devices, and social media, so we apologize to those desktop Hounds who are inconvenienced." Etc., etc.

                        If, by "admission of error" you meant simply changing some of the changes, then we are indeed using different languages.

                        My use of 'mutiny' was obviously metaphorical, but IMO, apt. And I'm not encouraging it, merely observing and commenting on it. If it sounds less rough, let's pick a different metaphor: an advisory referendum. If this thread's posts are tallied as votes in favor or agin the New Look, would the measure pass? Do you consider it a squeaker or a landslide?

                        Aloha,
                        Kaleo

                        1. re: kaleokahu

                          K, Thank you for using your talents and continuing to offer great suggestions that benefit the whole CH community.

                        2. re: HillJ

                          Hi, Justpaula:

                          LOL, that's ironic, isn't it? With the pages down to 5 threads per page (and now, for example 588 pages in Cookware alone), you are going to see threads being almost instantly buried.

                          It raises fascinatingly existential questions: If a mutiny takes place on a sinking ship, did it ever happen? If our attention spans are defined by the tiny, scrolly 4G screens and viral YouTubes, does it matter?

                          Aloha,
                          Kaleo

                          1. re: kaleokahu

                            When I bring up "Cookware" I see 20 threads.

                            1. re: GH1618

                              Hi, GH 1618:

                              On my display, I see only 5 at a time. There are more if you scroll, but as scrolls go, there are still only 5 viewable at any one time. I found being able to scan multiple threads (around 20 at a time) without scrolling very useful. Now I must scroll and repage by virtue of the extremely weird font size and wasted space.

                              Aloha,
                              Kaleo

                              1. re: GH1618

                                Hi, HillJ:

                                Aw, you're too kind. Thanks.

                                Aloha,
                                Kaleo

                      2. re: kaleokahu

                        What is "virtual unanimity"? It's not unanimous. Besides, it's normal for comments to be biased in favor of complaints.

                        In a "mutiny" the leaders of the mutiny take control of the ship away from the Captain. How are you going to do that?

                        1. re: GH1618

                          Your dark font reads so clearly in this recent change of color, GH. Progress is being made.

                          1. re: GH1618

                            You're taking that a bit too literally methinks. I think by "mutiny" that poster meant a general spirit of discontent and anger - which there has certainly been.

                            I'm pretty sure it's not a call to overthrow Chowhound, whatever the heck that means.

                            1. re: magic

                              Whatever the heck that means is right. The red buttons are all working well today.

                              1. re: magic

                                It's a metaphor chosen to suggest that the dissent is more widespread than it actually is. Despite the length of ths thread, and the strength of the criticism expressed here, there are many new threads on the usual Chowhound topics, and many new contributions to such threads. Chowhound sails on, so the "mutiny" metaphor is overstated.

                                1. re: GH1618

                                  Agreed. If I had visited CH today to find no new discussions, I could buy the mutiny theory. But, the truth is on boards other than Site Talk people seem to be moving along and talking about food - business as usual. Maybe we don't all love all facets of the re-design but we are still coming back to do what we do here. Even this board will settle down in due time.

                                  1. re: Justpaula

                                    surely the non-discussion on food boards has *everything* to do w/ the zealous moderators who censor anything they find off-topic. not sure what your home board is, mine's New Orleans and they are swift and merciless.

                                    500+ posts, overwhelmingly in agreement on the horriblness of this design is major.

                                    heres whats most insane:

                                    - font on board-listing is jumbo
                                    - font in this text-entry box is micro

                                    ...im on safari in windows. it's unusable and ive decided to quit reading the rest of week in the hops that they fix it because i dont want to fight my browser to enjoy and contribute to the content.

                                    1. re: kibbles

                                      safari in windows.....you should be as OK as me,it's us on one device and the first to be ???fine.

                                      With a couple of poster exceptions they are just as merciless in DC.

                            2. re: kaleokahu

                              I agree, there was no apology, there was a statement, of the design stays as it is. And so far all the "improvements" have been BUG fixes.
                              In terms of UI, there is factional improvement of contrast. But on my 12in. wide screen, the discussion thread only uses, 5.5 in. That over 50% of blank, glaring space! And within that less that 50% of space is an 8 pt. typeface. These are measurements taken at 100%, so no zoom is involved. This is the design that they are staying with, love it or leave.
                              There has not been in the past 6 years of design changes, any accommodation to UI complaints. Only bug fixes of the new design. The same will happen here.
                              If we look bck at the last major change in Aug 2010
                              http://chowhound.chow.com/topics/726572
                              Again a large amount of outrage, and in all, at the end only bug fixes were done.

                              And I really think that the hidden mods should be forced to use their mod diamonds in any and all Site Talk posts.

                              1. re: Quine

                                I trust this isn't a surprise . . . since the corporate media types have higher priorities than user satisfaction.

                                1. re: zin1953

                                  Yep no surprise. After, over 6 years, of Chowhound.com being one of my opening tabs, on each of my computers, I now turn the page. I may keep it bookmarked, but Why?

                                2. re: Quine

                                  The narrow discussion thread suits a tablet perfectly. I use mine in portrait mode, zoom the display (easy on a touch screen) so the width of the discussion column fits the screen and the advertising space disappears on the right. Since I want to zoom anyway to make the text easier for my old eyes to read, it all works out.

                                  1. re: GH1618

                                    Does NOT work well on my tablet using the Android platform.

                                    * Fonts are still E N O R M O U S
                                    * Some threads resist attempts to decrease size through normal tablet methods, i.e. tapping or pinching the screen
                                    * Massive amounts of scrolling
                                    * Minimal content
                                    * Not easy, seamless or intuititive to move between pages or boards

                                    It's worse on an Android smartphone. Looking at a page is like looking out a fish-eye peep hole

                      1. re: Gio

                        Me too. For me to come on Site Talk, you know it has to be bad.

                        1. re: Joanie

                          I hate it too. In fact, it is so bad that unless it soon changes, I will no longer visit this site -- and it has been one of my favorite sites for years. Reading this version gives me a head ache.

                          1. re: susanl143

                            Horrible. Again we have a case of "fixing" something that wasn't broken. And notice how the previous discussion disappeared and when found, is locked. I'm tempted to bid "Ciao" to Chow.

                            1. re: MacGuffin

                              Despise it. It's made reading threads difficult, and the text boxes are so oversized with ridiculously small font.

                              I sure hope Chow didn't pay to have someone design this abomination.

                            2. re: susanl143

                              gives me a headache too, I've notice that I can only handle 2 or 3 threads before I have to leave the site. Big thumbs down.

                              1. re: fickle

                                I turned down the brightness of my screen (although that should not be necessary).

                      2. is there any way to make each thread/topic smaller so i can see more on one page? there's less topics showing per page than the older format, partly due to font but also the height of the box around each topic. i tried to see if there were preferences that i could set to condense but did not find anything

                        44 Replies
                        1. re: auberginegal

                          agreed. the former "latest discussions" page now shows a meager 20 threads.... wah.

                            1. re: auberginegal

                              I think just making the whole box wider (use more screen real estate on a widescreen) would help a lot in seeing more of each thread when reading long posts.

                                1. re: westaust

                                  Wasted real-estate.

                                  The text column is too narrow, which means
                                  *** the size of the type is too small, too difficult to read
                                  ***too few threads can be displayed on the page

                                  Look at the proportion problems from these screen shots.
                                  This is the actual view -- nothing has been cropped.

                                  Look at all the wasted space on either side of the thread column.

                                  That's not design that is thought-out or at all user-friendly.
                                  As is, it drives LESS TRAFFIC to the site.

                                  It makes the site more difficult to read, and more difficult to navigate. I'm quite surprised the designers don't test drive these designs before "regular folk" before implementing them.

                                   
                                   
                                  1. re: maria lorraine

                                    The opening post claims, "We’ve conducted user testing with both casual and long-term users ..."

                                    It's hard to believe that even the most casual testing would not have identified the problems with fonts, contrast, and white space.

                                    Actually, it's hard to believe that the designers even checked their own work.

                                    1. re: Robert Lauriston

                                      I agree, Robert! Basic testing would have revealed the glaring errors in this UI.

                                2. re: auberginegal

                                  Agreed. While I think they did it this way to make it easier for mobile users to read the site, it really makes it hard for us normal computer users to read.... way too much dead space!

                                  1. re: juliejulez

                                    One thing that might help is to make the font size of the thread titles smaller. It is currently 13.5 which is pretty large.... even taking it down to size 10 would make it much easier to read and would maybe allow for more threads to be shown on each page.

                                    1. re: juliejulez

                                      I am on the site on my phone right now and it is just as bad with mobile. The text is huge. It's like the think everyone still uses a Motorola Razr or something from 2005.

                                      Make the text smaller!

                                      1. re: JDAWG

                                        Agreed. Smaller font, please!

                                      2. re: juliejulez

                                        +1.

                                        Sorry devteam, but this new look is not a win.

                                        I just got a nice 27" monitor and it's really sad to see LESS content. Of course, the bigger monitor is not the problem; the site design is the problem. The increased white space around each topic requires more scrolling which is worse for my hands. I've had other favorite sites go to a similar mobile-oriented look with no "show dense content" setting. Sigh.

                                        Time to find other sites to read. Will try to check back in a few months.

                                         
                                        1. re: 1MunchieMonster

                                          Whatever you do, do not get Windows 8. It is designed for use with mobil devices.

                                      3. re: auberginegal

                                        Yeah on my 1440x900 macbook laptop, the layout doesn't show enough text.

                                        1. re: auberginegal

                                          Me, too. I understand that the current layout is optimal for mobile apps, but it's annoying on a desktop to have so much waste space and so much less info on the screen. On the other hand, the type in this reply box is annoyingly small!

                                          1. re: Ruth Lafler

                                            I guess Chowhound or CBS (or Conde Nast did I hear someone say?) is only interested in iPhoners.

                                            1. re: Jay F

                                              What's stupid is that if they keep driving away the people who actually provide content -- instead of just consuming it -- they won't have any content left to consume!

                                              The sorting by popularity function is particularly prone to that -- let's all just pile on the popular topic instead of starting something new!

                                              And did they change the font in the reply box already?

                                              No, it seems that the font is different for different levels of reply. Or something.

                                              1. re: Ruth Lafler

                                                Yes, it changes when you edit. I am seriously having trouble reading this small font.

                                                1. re: Ruth Lafler

                                                  I have to agree with you Ruth. We contributors are much more likely to be contributing from a non-mibile device, as if we are typing anything of length, it is just easier than doing it from a smart phone or tablet. I hope they fix this.

                                                  1. re: TeacherFoodie

                                                    I was thinking the same thing. If CH caters to mobile users without concern of losing desktop users, I'm sure the quality of the content will suffer. We'll be seeing a lot more posts without punctuation (Siri really sucks at that), spell check and just overall thought, consideration and editing.

                                                    Looking for short, random, off-the-cuff remarks? I thought that's what facebook and twitter were for.

                                                    1. re: soypower

                                                      Yes - mobile devices are great for getting content, but not as great for creating it. I agree that the shift towards mobile devices is going to have a bad effect on the level of discourse in places like this.

                                                      Personally, while I have a mobile device, when I login to the forums I frequent from them, I'm much less likely to contribute. That isn't because their mobile interface isn't good, but rather because it's too much of a hassle to type a thoughtful response on my ipad.

                                                  2. re: Ruth Lafler

                                                    I couldn't have put it better than that. Thanks for saying it for all of us.

                                                2. re: Ruth Lafler

                                                  "We’ve ... come up with a design that we believe works for mobile as well as desktop users. We’re proud of what we’ve accomplished."

                                                  Jacquilynne, DaveMP, Engineering:

                                                  Did Chowhound actually think a single software architecture could successfully be deployed for both computer and mobile systems?

                                                  This is such a fundamental computer architecture error -- going back to the most basic of basics -- it's rather astounding.

                                                  Mobile systems require completely separate architecture from fixed device systems. One of the big architecture issues in mobile systems is space constraint; computer systems do not have this space constraint -- hence the huge graphic errors we are witnessing.

                                                  No one told Chowhound that mobile architecture would not work for computer systems, and vice versa?

                                                  Chowhound/CNET consulted with no software architects who surely would have explained why a single architecture wouldn't work? Why not?

                                                  Did anyone analyze the software visualizations and their ease of use across devices during development? The errors we're currently seeing would have been obvious had this been done.

                                                  If Chowhound/CNET deployed a single software architecture as a "cost-saving" tactic, please realize that correctly designing architecture for all platforms in the first place would have been the most cost-efficient approach. You will now have to spend more time and money to fix things.

                                                  Please hire software architects who clearly understand the separate architecture considerations of mobile vs. fixed systems, and who also understand the specific design details that create an easy end-user experience. This has an effect on your bottom line -- the end-user experience must be easy and enjoyable enough to maintain traffic and commercial viability.

                                                  You have really wrecked a good thing. I love Chowhound; I so wish you folks had been more informed and had consulted experts when you decided to change your software.

                                                  1. re: maria lorraine

                                                    Very well put. It's astounding to see an organization like this make such bad decisions. It's even more astounding to think that nothing ever happened to make anyone rethink this idea. I have a feeling that working for CBS Interactive might not be the greatest job.

                                                    1. re: SnackHappy

                                                      This post will probably be yanked, but if you've ever wondered what it might be like to work for Chowhound post-acquisition (I guess it was CNET at that time), just check out Jim Leff's slog at http://jimleff.blogspot.com/2008/12/c...
                                                      Hilarious and tragic story of corporate-think at its worst. It's long, but well-written and worth staying with -- especially when you get to the part about "Clay". Supposedly Clay left the building, but there seem to be some other "Clays" who've taken his place.

                                                      1. re: Steve Green

                                                        Horrifying. Contrast the usual corporate MO with that of Aldi, the firm that holds Trader Joe's. They at least knew better than to argue with success when they made that acquisition and have maintained a hands-off policy, resulting in a retailing miracle. (Of course, the continued hiring of CEOs who were on the same page as their predecessors didn't hurt.) I can just imagine the POB responsible for overseeing CH reading this and earnestly puzzling over how to manipulate "hands-off" to make it fit the corporate template.

                                                        The corporate mentality scares the bejeepers out of me. Apparently, "Clay" is the metamorphosis "taught" in MBA programs. Almost like something found in literature, isn't he?

                                                      2. re: SnackHappy

                                                        Yeah, I've been having the same thought for a couple of days.

                                                  2. re: auberginegal

                                                    Agreed! It seems a little wrong that I can see the same number of thread titles on my laptop screen as my mobile screen. The thread titles on the laptop look cartoonish, they are so huge. Too big for even my aging eyes.

                                                    1. re: Scruffy The Cat

                                                      "Cartoonish" was exactly the word that came to mind the first time I saw it!

                                                      1. re: Ruth Lafler

                                                        Reminds me of the old fashioned BIG COLORING BOOKS.

                                                        1. re: HillJ

                                                          SEE SPOT RUN. RUN SPOT RUN. SEE DICK RUN. SEE JANE RUN. RUN JANE RUN.

                                                          1. re: Uncle Bob

                                                            At least "Spot" implies contrast. White-on-white...I guess the compensation is the H U G E font. This is beyond horrible.

                                                            I'm too much of a lady to post what I think of CNET. First they crippled VersionTracker, now this. Is there such a thing as "the un-Midas touch?"

                                                            1. re: MacGuffin

                                                              Talofa, MacGuffin:

                                                              In the Islands we call it Pā ʻili Kūkae, a/k/a The Fecal Touch.

                                                              Kaleo

                                                              1. re: kaleokahu

                                                                Talofa, my friend! At some point I might just be able to scrape my hysterically laughing self off the floor...

                                                          2. re: HillJ

                                                            What is interesting is that at home I use an older Apple laptop and old version of Safari and the font size is quite small.

                                                        2. re: Scruffy The Cat

                                                          I feel like I'm reading a comic book. Not to be taken seriously. And I have my font set at Comic sans MS so you can imagine how that looks. All this needs is a "bubble" above everyone's head.

                                                            1. re: auberginegal

                                                              Agreed - I have a 19" screen and can see 3 1/2 post titles (after I Adblocked the New Site! banner). Making us work harder to view content and having the regular site look like a mobile site is backwards.

                                                              1. re: MplsM ary

                                                                I've discovered that you have to AdBlock the New Site Design! banner on every thread. For whatever reason, it's not "sticking" as permanently blocked. VERY frustrating to have it still there.

                                                                1. re: LindaWhit

                                                                  Not so with Chrome AdBlock. Once, and it's gone!

                                                                  1. re: MplsM ary

                                                                    That's what I'm using. And the damn banner keeps coming back.

                                                              2. re: auberginegal

                                                                Agree!! Also, make the poster name a little bit bigger! I need to use magnifying glass!

                                                                1. re: auberginegal

                                                                  +1000

                                                                  Without reading this whole page I'm sure most of the complaints will along these lines. What a silly thing to do. It looks like a second grade reader and there are so few topics on a page. Ugh!

                                                                2. Could you please revise the new look so it doesn't take up so much screen real estate? I can only see like 25% of the number of threads I used to be able to see; instead there's a ton of white space around each thread now. I don't get how this is supposed to be better. It just makes the site difficult to use.

                                                                  6 Replies
                                                                  1. re: Luther

                                                                    + a gazillion! WAY too much space is taken up when you're looking at your profile's list of threads!!

                                                                      1. re: Luther

                                                                        I agree. There are fewer posts visible at once and thus it is much harder to read as more scrolling and page-changing is required. There is no need to foist a mobile-capable view on desktop/notebook/full-sized tablet users. You could detect the platform and act accordingly.

                                                                        I know many sites are going to the low-density designs, but I don't think it helps.

                                                                        1. re: travelerjjm

                                                                          Big +1 agreement here. The trend towards this type of web layout drives me apesh*t bonkers. It is SO unfriendly to the desktop user, and frankly, it's annoying on my phone too.

                                                                        2. re: Luther

                                                                          Things are WAAAAAAY too big. Ugly, with a capital UG.

                                                                          This step backwards took 6 months? Really?! Wow.

                                                                          1. re: FishTales

                                                                            Just imagine how horrible it would be if they took a full year!

                                                                        3. Where are the NEW icons showing that the thread has something new on it when viewed in your profile list of conversations you're participating on? That is seriously necessary when a thread climbs up anywhere past 50 posts.

                                                                          23 Replies
                                                                          1. re: LindaWhit

                                                                            Wait - so now something that is LIGHT GRAY is unread in your thread list, and DARK GRAY is read?

                                                                            Boo. Put back the yellow NEW "button". Much more visible and recognizable. If you've got someone who's got color issues, the differences in grays might not be as noticeable, whereas at least the NEW button was visible.

                                                                            1. re: LindaWhit

                                                                              I don't have problems wth color discernment, and it was hard for me to distinguish between the grays. I can only imagine how that must affect people with color blindness or other visual color issues.

                                                                              1. re: LindaWhit

                                                                                YES . . . bring back the "NEW" . . . button, I mean. Otherwise, bring back the OLD design!

                                                                                1. re: zin1953

                                                                                  Why would they even get rid of the new button?? Makes no sense. Yikes. Stupid.

                                                                                  It might simply be a "getting used to" thing, but the grey/white shading seems needlessly confusing.

                                                                                  1. re: magic

                                                                                    The shading is particularly difficult if all of the (very few) posts on the page are the same color, so there's no contrast to signal their status.

                                                                                    1. re: Ruth Lafler

                                                                                      Exactly! I guess we are supposed to have a "visual memory" of what "new gray" and "old gray" look like!

                                                                                      1. re: DGresh

                                                                                        that was a problem I was having - does paler mean read or unread? or darker? its just not enough of a visual cue to tell me anything (on the mobile side) on the computer, the visuals are slightly more suggestive - but when there is no logic differentiating the two modes, only confusion reigns. Its like if you have the red/blue political map - its taken years of reinforcement and derivative expressions like red-state to teach us all that blue means dems and not reps. Give us the NEW marker back - like the SAVE which I am looking at right now - and all the confusion goes away and I dont have to worry about shades of grey. That joke will only last a little while.

                                                                                      2. re: Ruth Lafler

                                                                                        Yes! Just realized the problem with the lack of contrast cuing you when they're all the same shade. I thought it was just going to be a matter of getting used to it, but a couple times today I clicked on a thread here today on site talk, thinking there would be new posts but it was actually the other shade of gray indicating all-read. Needs to be something that you see and automatically and without thinking about it, you know what it means (as before).

                                                                                2. re: LindaWhit

                                                                                  Apparently a thread with no new posts will be grayed out. This will obviously take some getting used to.

                                                                                  1. re: LindaWhit

                                                                                    Yes, please I can find it! and I don't see it on the tutorial

                                                                                    1. re: LindaWhit

                                                                                      The icons are gone, but the background is white for threads with new posts, gray for threads without new posts.

                                                                                      I, too, would like to be able to see more text (vs. more white space) on a page. But I like that the first line of each response is visible even in a collapsed thread.

                                                                                      1. re: small h

                                                                                        I was hopeful that the redesign would mean faster page loading on the iPad, but no. I could not get the edit button to work, either. I stabbed at it multiple times, like Norman Bates' dead mama - nuthin'. Last complaint of the night: it's no longer useful to search on a page for the word "ago" in order to jump to the latest post. Because "ago" appears too many times, now. Anyone have a new method, in case I can't come up with my own?

                                                                                      2. re: LindaWhit

                                                                                        They chose to put a slight gray on the posts that have not been updated since you last opened that thread. It is not enough. On the mobil site the time that the thread was last updated (how long ago it was added to) is in red.

                                                                                        Mods....the non-mobil site needs to have the "how long ago the thread was last updated" in red just like it is on the mobil site. This is a deal breaker for me.

                                                                                        Personally, while I understand nobody likes change, I do not see why the look made as drastic a change as it has. Like I said on another thread about this, this is job justification if I ever saw it.

                                                                                        Ok, I just typed this post, now what? Where is the button to get it posted?

                                                                                        edit...really? the SAME button?

                                                                                        1. re: John E.

                                                                                          Yup - to you and small h - I noted that above in the reply to myself.

                                                                                          But I still think that could be an issue with someone who has color gradient eyesight issues. Something for them to think about.

                                                                                          1. re: LindaWhit

                                                                                            I don't have color issues, but it is still not enough of a contrast. I mentioned the red thing in the upper right on the mobil edition. That should also be used on the regular site.

                                                                                            1. re: John E.

                                                                                              See, that's why the former yellow NEW! button would be more appropriate. It stands out way better than tehse two similar shades of grey.

                                                                                              If it ain't broke, DON'T FIX IT!

                                                                                            2. re: LindaWhit

                                                                                              Ok, I've figured out the easiest way to detect a thread which has been updated. The category, ie. Home Cooking, Cookeware, etc., is in red if the thread has been updated. It is black if you've have read all the posts, or at least have opened the thread.

                                                                                          2. re: LindaWhit

                                                                                            If a discussion you've previously read has new updates, there'll be an arrow next to the post count in the middle column.

                                                                                            1. re: Jacquilynne

                                                                                              Jacquilynne, that is COMPLETELY unintuitive. Why would the change have been made from the NEW symbol? Was the change made just tor the sake of making a change? Come on. This goes back to K.I.S.S.

                                                                                              1. re: Jacquilynne

                                                                                                Just look at the way the red diamond pops next to your name.

                                                                                                The use of color to mark a new post -- the red in "New" -- did everything to draw attention to which threads have have new posts. This tiny bit of color that pops is far more functional than gradations of gray and bold type. Put the red color back.

                                                                                                Keep the arrow in the same place, perhaps, next to the number of replies, but do something to make it pop, please? Add red to the arrow.

                                                                                                Also, the placement of the number and arrow is wrong. Should be on the far left.

                                                                                                1. re: Jacquilynne

                                                                                                  I'm envious of the lovely red diamond to the right of your name (and Dave MP's name), Jacquilynne,

                                                                                                  ~TDQ

                                                                                                  1. re: The Dairy Queen

                                                                                                    Isn't it amazing how something so small (and COLORFUL!) actually stands out to everyone in a gray-on-gray world? It's rather like the movie "Pleasantville" - just in reverse. We HAD color; now we're in the gray world.

                                                                                                2. re: LindaWhit

                                                                                                  Absolutely. This a glaring loss.

                                                                                                3. I second what auberginegal said about the size.