Well, here it is. At the end of the proverbial day, a website saved is a website earned. I’m sorry I prepared y’all for a quick and brutal transition into paid content, and then dumped a free site on you. Psych! Actually, over the last few days I gradually realized there was no way to give this ship a proper shakedown cruise without putting it on-line. And if it wasn’t 100% ready for prime time, how in the name of St. Anthony could I ask you to pay for it? Why I’d be no better than GM! We’ve got plenty of time to make this the world's best automotive website.
Many of you have emailed in technical suggestions, which I immediately forwarded to Redwing. Rest assured that the back end boys are assembling a punch list of all the geeky stuff that passed over the e-transom. Feel free to continue the technological onslaught. We’re still working out some functionality issues (e.g. all commentators need to be able to edit their posts quickly and easily). I’m sure there will be others. And please let us know quickly if something goes wrong: denied permissions, glitches in function, etc. You are our eyes and ears (and we yours). Use the comments button below.
As for the site’s heart, soul and style, here’s what I figure. The home page doesn’t have enough posts. Well, that’s my take. The old home page had around twenty items in descending chronological order. Should we return to a lengthy home page or stick with the new shortened version (currently set at ten posts)? A glitch resulted in some posts having two paragraphs on the home page, before the jump. I preferred one. Yes? Do you miss the old open road animation at the top, or are you OK with a different detail shot every time? Which buttons are confusing or redundant? Is there something we missed? Something you really like?
Anyway, change is a bitch. You should see the content management side of this bad boy; it’s got a more complicated back end than the first version of the last gen 7-Series. (Who are these Word Press people and why do I think the name was originally used for a seventeenth century printing press modified to interrogate suspected witches?) One thing I’ll be looking for: the car stats. If they have to be migrated over by hand– a nightmare that will teach me far too much about torque– now might be a good time to modify them to include/exclude more info. What stats are we missing? And are there enough rating categories? Forbes said no a while back. What say you?
No, I’m not having an attack of the Bill O’Reillies. In fact, we’ve gone the other direction. You may recall that Brock Yates’ work was slated to appear here. At the sixteenth hour, Mr. Yates developed a cold. Then he decided he wouldn’t put fingers to plastic on our behalf unless we paid him a significant amount of cash (after agreeing to a percentage). Then it wasn’t the money, but the fact that the number of posts per month was too great (four) for his busy schedule. Fair points all, and he’s free to negotiate whatever deal he likes. But he might have mentioned this when we were scarfing sushi in Boston. I’ve left it that I’ll contact him again in two weeks. Should I? Guess which way I'm leaning…
The really good news: our writers are getting better. We’ve added some terrific new voices to the choir, and the regulars are sending in some pitch perfect stuff. Elton is about to throw down another gauntlet (should be interesting to see the comments). A newbie named Jehovah Johnson starts off on Q7 patrol. Mehta met a Morgan. Williams thinks car manufacturers have a license to lie. Lieberman is condemned to Fords. I’m about to Watch GM Die AND get a car to review. And there’s lots more challenging material to come. NOW how much would you pay? Not THAT again…
Yes, I already miss the old open road animation at the top, reminds me of my recent cross-country trip off the interstates.
Brock Yates not going to happen? Too bad, but you know the old goat is kind of cantankerous.
Not missing the animation because these beautifully cropped photos are my favorite part of the new design. Please don’t change them!
I agree with the contrast between the type and background being a little harsh. I’d try a grey type instead of this black (dark grey?).
Homepage has plenty of posts, but if you are worried about it you could give users the option to set the amount they wish to see.
You need something to indicate which section you are in. Right now their is not much to tell me if I am in Editorials or Podcasts or what. Either the buttons need to have a selected state, or you need a page header.
Overall I love the simplicity of the new design. The details can be tweaked, but don’t go too far and make it over-designed.
Here are a couple of good web design gallery sites to visit if you want to research what others are doing. Not everything posted is good, but some of it is great, and the galleries are easy to browse.
http://www.stylegala.com/archive/
http://cssbeauty.com/gallery/
I am sad to hear that Yates may not appear. That would have been a major draw for me to move to a paid subscription.
Also, I believe that the typeface used on the old site was close to ideal.
The links on the left, while 40 times better than the buttons, are still bad.
They don’t need to be underlined of have a gray back ground.
Switch it so that when you roll over them, they become underlined — as it is now, they draw too much attention.
Also, why is the gutter between the link and the content so damn big? “The Vagina Dialogues Pt. 2” should be able to fit on one line. So, shrink the gutter and/or widen the links.
Have you tried this site with the Firefox browser? I have roll bars everywhere…
Being the naturally pleasant, mellow, laid back, and agreeable person that I am, I have to say I like the new look and feel. I don’t have any problem with the new typeface. At work a use a wide monitor set at 1680×1050 resolution and at home I have a standard aspect ration moitor set at 1024×768. I have no problem reading the site on either.
Those who have never been on the back side of a web site deployment may not realize it, but what our Fearless Leader did here is nothing short of miraculous. It takes a lot of blood, sweat, and tears (and coffee, microwave popcorn, and Mountain Dew) for a site to debut with as few glitches as this one did. THe rest is just minor tweaking and tuning. Well done!
The new site looks really clean and fresh. Love the cropped shots. I agree that the sidebar is a little distracting, and the typeface could dim it down a touch. the top menu bar seems a little cramped too but, overall great work. Too bad about Yates, it may end up being for the best in the long run. Keep fightin’ the good fight
I like the cropped photos, also. But, heck, I liked the buttons. This is a very stylish site in a sort of minimalist (that is not too overdone) sort of way. OCD pays off. Good job!
The buttons are okay. The underlined links to past posts within a category are not so good. I object to both the underline and the inclusion of most (all?) past posts. Maybe a selection of the last 60-days worth or fewer would be better.
As for suggestions to the style of the text, I would recommend Make Magazine’s site (http://www.makezine.com/) as an excellent example. It is at one time minimalist in its decoration and informative because each “category” is identified by a distinct color. They also use a system of icons to identify the category of a particular piece of content. They employ a standard font with titles in black and text in dark gray.
I like the random detail photo at the top. I’m tired
of the old open road image. If people really complain,
maybe make each section have it’s own static detail
image.
Generally I like the new clean look. The gray buttons
are fine. The text for me is quite readable, don’t
make it any smaller anyway. Please don’t make the place
too much more busy visually.
Need a way to make a real link in the comments.
Rob
I’m not crazy about the “Category Posts” on the LH side of the page, too distracting. I liked the old way of doing it via minimalist buttons. (sorry JL!)
I’ll second Sajeev’s post above – lists on the LH side are useful in a browse type site – shopping basically – when I am glancing over a few things in the center while keeping track of my options for other “aisles” to visit via the LH nav.
On a text based site like this, my eye gets dragged to the LH nav while I am trying to concentrate on what I am reading. I find it hard to block out all the text on the left while trying to read the posts.
IMO, the main thing you want visitors to read should be in the upper left – like the page of any book or mag. In shopping you want to give ’em all the places they can go and search. With writing, you want ’em to be able to read the current article/post.
Wow…comment section — how very bloggy of you, Mr. Farago.
The buttons were hideous and rightly destroyed.
Still, the links on the left should not be gray.
Try this — hit your back button and notice how clean the home page looks. Then hit forward, and notice how distracting the gray on the left now is.
The only difference is the gray.
I, like many others have said, like the new layout. I really enjoy the cropped close-ups. The font, in this incarnation, is perfect. I do have a couple navigation related suggestions though.
Ditch the editorial links on the side bar and replace it with the old links of Home, Editorials, Reviews, etc. It will help to reduce the clutter along the side. Many times I will just hit the back button to get back to the Editorial home directory.
The site is known for its GM Death Watch series. I think that a rather nice touch would be to include a link to a listing of just the Death Watch series. It would certainly be benefitial for new, and old, members who would like to read through them (again).
Yup, ditch the gray and see if that’s good enough for the Barnett Newmans of the world.
Robert, if I haven’t said it yet, this format is da bomb.
Jon’s here. He thanks you for your kind words. Now…
We’re indentifying issues, listening to feedback (e.g. scroll bar invasion via Firefox) and will do “whatever the Hell we feel like anyway.”
Seriously, keep the suggestions coming.
Still one of the best (online) layouts around. Definitely not catering to the “yeay” sayer clan that CEO’s throughout the industry like to surround themselves with.
The quick link by brand/model to the reviews on the lefthand side is an absolute must, since we gearheads here at work (automotive service) like to “trump” each others with facts and opinions. I like the cropped photos over animations any time, since I do not suffer from a short attention span and do not need a constant flickering reminder. Also I take a tasteful photo at a good redolution anytime over an animation!! Well done!!
Val
Looks like the old podcast feed is gone (ttac.com/podcast.rss); will that be coming back, or will there be another URL that’s iTunes-friendly?
Aristotle said that tragedy is composed of six elements. In descending order of importance, they are : plot, character, thought, diction, song and spectacle. Not much is tragic about the new TTAC site, but I needed a metaphor. Sorry.
The “plot” of the site will remain the same. Well-written articles on pertinent topics.
The site could improve in developing “character” within its editorial staff. Editors should have distinct voices. We should know that Article A may disagree with Editor B’s opinion. I’d love to see interviews, or at least more interplay between editors. This all may come with the uptick in articles in this new edition.
TTAC’s “thought” has always been its strong suit. It is a site of iconoclastic, honest, and well written reviews and editorials on automotive issues. Ditto for “diction”, split infinitves are an endangered species here.
In Ancient Greek theatre, “song” usually refers to the importance and unifying quality of the chorus, representing the community behind the play’s action. These message boards are the first “songs” heard on TTAC.
“Spectacle”, how this site looks, is the least of your worries. But I might suggest continuing the dark gray top and bottom motif along the sides, with the article links, for unity’s sake.
Thanks and keep up the good work
scroll bars….
need to update Firefox if you have those. It’s a bug and fixed in the latest version – and contrary to the prior post, we do care what you think.
http://www.mozilla.com
Anyone notice that the Infiniti catagory is spelled Infinity? *pokes* the silly web developer :)
absolutely nothing offensive about the look of the new site, and some of it very visually appealing: cropped pics, font, contrasting background of comments, this red box around where i’m typing now is pretty cool.
fantastic news about yates. don’t bother calling him (unless it’s collect at 4am just for shits and grins).
What, pray tell, is “shits and grins?”
I like the look of the site so far. Great work. Just a note about comments though – might be nice to have them on a seperate page in forum maybe like http://canadiandriver.com or (shudder) autoweek.com.
Comments in order that they’ve appeared here:
1) I prefer the detail shots to the animation.
2) The contrast for the type is just fine for me. I have bad eyesight and a tendency to not visit my optometrist in a timely manner. Black on white is always easier to read (IMO).
3) I think the main page has just the right amount of posts. By the time I scan beyond the 4th entry, I’m digging deeper into the site anyway (I’ll flow into the editorials, or reviews; whichever suits my taste at that point)
4) There should be some type of differentiation for each category. A simple “Editorials / Reviews / Podcasts” above “Categories/Category Posts”. (Did I mention that I love the detail shots!?)
5) The links on the left are a little intrusive. With the grey background changing to green (really? green?) there is no need for them to be underlined. I believe just that small change would vastly improve the look. I disagree that the gutter is too big. With that much space it is easy to continue to read and not be interrupted by the links.
6) I love the detail shots so much it deserves to be said again.
Some of my own comments about the new site:
1) I REALLY love the detail shots (I’m posting here while viewing the site in another window just to keep looking at them!)
2) Green as a secondary color? Just my opinion but ewww…
3) Podcasts. I know they are ‘in’ right now, and many people enjoy them. I am not one of these people. At any given time I am listening to music while reading. I have never heard one entire podcast on your site. I try (I am interested in what is being said), but I cannot sit here and listen to them. I would LOVE it if there were a transcript of the podcasts that I could read while listening to (currently) Bach’s ‘Toccata and Fugue in D Minor’.
To summarize I love the new site. This was expected as I loved the content of the old site, and you have made great improvements to the design. I couldn’t agree with nathaniel more: “Overall I love the simplicity of the new design. The details can be tweaked, but don???t go too far and make it over-designed.”
Thanks for all your help. Keep it coming. Here are my current priorities:
1. Get some posts up. Our writers have responded to the new site with a burst of editorial exhuberance. We’ve got some killer material, and it needs to see the light of day ASAP.
2. Fix the New Content Notification System (the program that sends out an email whenever a new post appears).
3. Restore the stats and stars to the reviews.
4. Clean up the site’s look. All the editorial-related links on the side are toast. The gutters will be widened. We’ll keep the buttons on the top blacked-out, so you can see where you are in the site. (Jonathan Wellington’s idea.)
5. Back to one, and start again.
It’s been a wild ride getting this thing on-line. Rest assured we will never change our MO and clutter the site, and that we know what’s important: the writing. So… back to it then.
Redwing/Robert: if you click on an image (with caption) on the main page (i.e. not when reading the entire review) the picture shows up, but the LH portion of the white border is thicker than the RH side. (I’m on Firefox version 1.5.0.4)
Other than that little snafu, that is one frickin awesome way to display pictures. You guys/gals outdid yourselves!
didn’t you immerse yourself in the english culture while you were there? :-)
here’s the translated version:
http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=shits+and+giggles
Sajeev, can you take a screen shot of the problem you were describing and email it to me? truth@redwingstudio.com Thanks.
The site looks good. However, do call Brock and work something out with him. My hunch is it will increase traffic. I have never found him cantankerous as much as thoughtful, intelligent, funny and a savvy negotiator. He has always been kind to me and he encourages talent. But then, I have never tried to hire him to do anything, save for writing an introduction for a book I was working on.
He is arguably, the best known automotive journalist in America. And while boy-racers everwhere can debate if he knows his stuff, how many of them have been published in the Wall Street Journal, the Washington Post and the American Spectator? Brock is truly thought-provoking.
Brock has a gift for putting anything involving automobiles into context, largely because he is a student of history. The only writer who did something similar when writing about the automobile was the late, great Leon Mandel. Please, Robert work something out with Brock. I speak for many of us when I saw we want to read his work at TTAC. He belongs here.
Correction to last post: I speak for many of us when I say, we want to read Brock’s work at TTAC. He belongs here.