My long-suffering programming guru read me the riot act this morning: TTAC's classic format must die. It's too much of a programming hassle to update 'n sync with changes to the new format. When I said there are loyal readers who love the format as a quick way to stay up-to-date with the top of the pile latest of the latest, she showed me the stats. Less than two percent of use guys use Classic cocaine TTAC. Case closed. Sorry. It's a shame that on websites as with cars, the most loyal users are the ones least likely to embrace change. Me, I love it. I've always believed that every new Porsche 911 is better than the last. But for every five thousand of me there's one Stephan Wilkinson, a passionate keeper of the flame who'll probably tell you that my decision to dare utter such a heresy reveals the fact that I'm as dumb as a bag of rocks. (As if I need help.) But evolution is. That's it. It just is (whatever is is). If TTAC is to thrive and survive, we've got to keep doing what we do better than how we did it before. So, in compensation for readers five-stepping their way through Classic format grief, I can tell you that we're cleaning this sucker up a bit to make it more prettier and abusive friendly. Feel better? I thought not. Anyway, the rest of you may now return to our normal programing.
Find Reviews by Make:
Read all comments
Gah! What if I reload classic 100,000 times today, will that bring the stats up? :)
I guess I won’t be too upset if the new format allows me to save preferences so that I get _all_ of the comments on one page in chronological order.
Only ran into this website yesterday, but I declare “New is Better” after viewing both formats.
i will miss it, i read ttac everyday and so it was nice to have all my content shown in a single queue
One more thing, it’s not that hard to pull the same data out of the table and apply separate formatting. Hope you don’t think I’m flaming here, but I might suggest you withdraw the “guru” title from your long-suffering programming guru. Adding a second formatting option for the same data should be maybe 1% more work. That’s what the whole separation of data, business logic, and presentation is all about.
As a programmer, I will also give a vote for miked’s choice
I second what Maxo said, but I’ve enjoyed this site for a few years, so I guess I’ll get used to looking in different places.
Ack! I don’t want to be a member of a two-percent minority. Especially when it will soon be zero percent.
How else am I supposed to keep track of all the content of TTAC? How on earth does everybody else do it?
Just asking: why doesn’t TTAC offer an email service? I’d be real glad to get an email every time a new article appears, perhaps just with the headline?
Martin – TTAC does have an email service. I’m currently subscribed to it.
mike d: golly. but thanks!
I program too. Miked is correct.
I will miss the clean uncluttered look.
Format?? What format? I just get the RSS feed.
Seriously though: It annoys the %$#@ out of me when I click through to read the comments (frequently the best part of the site) and have to click that “show all” button all the @#% time.
–chuck
dagnabit all to heck and back, i’ll be bamboozled if i can figure out this new inturnets design. the gumption!
“Zero…ZERO….ZERO!” I agree. I never read this site. I’m not even reading what I’m writing right now.
If you break the embargoes how will you get the kewl new pictures and such? Or are you on the sh*tlist already?
If TTAC Classic doesn’t “sell,” then you’re doing what you advise Detroit, cut and focus to do better. The look’s probaly unimportant, people probably come for the content and the colorful personalities. And for key phrases like “clubbing baby seals” which, without context, could be baby seals out partying on the town.
Beetlebug: What “kewl” new pictures? Breaking the embargo brought us a pic of an Escalade. Or is the “ew” in “kewl” the significant part?
The classic interface facilitates finding, reading and commenting. I did not realize it is restorable. Its imminent demise is regrettable.
The new version’s major shortcomings include excessive clicking for new information, difficulty locating the latest podcast and the frequent requirement to click on Show All Comments.
Other sites have adopted a similar cluttered look. It is tolerable until the next design fad comes along. The hired help feeling hassled is a less than compelling rationale.
Speaking as a Two Percenter in all seriousness, this stinks.
Too much of a programming hassle? That’s like Frank Lloyd Wright saying Fallingwater is a hassle, why not just slap up a log cabin.
Robert, expect a chilly reception from me at the TTAC Christmas party.
NO! Say it aint’ so Robert! I have ALWAYS preferred the classic look. Sometimes my PC would give me the so called “improved” interface. I always switched it back to classic.
What I can’t believe is that only two percent of us use this view anymore. Oh well, I guess it makes sense. I’m one of the few people I know that wants/knows how to drive a manual trans. My last two vehicles have been sticks.
To tell you the truth (as if), I’m not a big fan of either design.
The classic TTAC design was ideal for visitors who wanted to read every post, regardless of classification. I have no idea why someone would want to digest TTAC any other way, but there it is, there they are, and we can’t change their wiring. Well, not without a lot of illegal intervention. And we’ve got enough enemies without breaking actual laws.
The new design would look a LOT better with some real ads (hint, hint). But it’s still doesn’t harmonize the site’s three main elements (excluding dysprosium) in an elegant, minimalist manner. If anyone wants to shine their light of genius on a new new new new new new design, I’m all eyes.
Meanwhile, I’m concentrating on the writing. If only because there’s so damn much of it.
As for the number of visitors who “choose” New versus Classic…
I chose Classic shortly after New came out because it wasn’t possible to post using New from a Macintosh with Firefox. Clearly a basic testing failure…
Some time afterwards I found my “Classic” choice had automatically changed back to New, but I was able to change back, which I did.
Over time, I guess the bugs were worked out of New…I found myself with New and no longer bothering to change back to Classic.
My take…
– Choosing Classic was likely implemented through an expiring browser cookie, whereas choosing New is default. So the two numbers can’t, really, be directly compared. I say this based upon how this stuff generally works…I could confirm it, but I have a glass of wine in front of me and would rather enjoy it.
– I can easily believe that maintaining both Classic and New is more work than maintaining only New. The coding could be structured such that the delta is small, but the testing burden is substantial.
– Therefore, if this posts, listen to your programmer. If not then I’ll repost something distinctly different… :-)
– But if you do listen to your programmer, don’t believe that Classic versus New is an equal choice. It’s not…not only do people get New by default, but people who choose Classic (well, at least _this_ person) have to repeatedly renew that choice, whereas people who have New thrusted upon them do not.
Tom.
I still miss the original site design. It had such nice color and was so easy to read. Even easier then the present “classic” version(font type/size/background color).
I use “classic” and much prefer it. “New” looks cooler, I’ll admit, but classic is much much better for me (i generally come by once or twice a day) to be able to see what was posted and read a each blog post without incessant click-read-back-click-read-back.
I agree with miked above who said that you must allow the site to save preferences for “Show All Comments” if you euthanize the “Classic” version. That’s the remaining 40% of the reason that I use “Classic.” When you have 120 comments and each page only shows 20 (or is it 10?)…UGH!
I don’t really have a choice in this. My work firewall has a problem with the ‘editorials’ and in the ‘classic’ view, the page is blocked any time an enditorial is on top. I’ve read this site for a couple of years now, every day (i hate my desk) and as long as the content doesn’t change, i really don’t care. It’s like when your girlfriend get’s a new haircut…it may be a little weird at first, but she’s still the same girl. RF just keep on keeping on; I don’t care how you present it, just keep spitting out the truth.
@ttilley:
I post in new using firefox on a mac.
I will miss it (another 2% here).
Dang it
I agree with the apparent minority, classic is much easier to see all the content at once, reducing click-thru’s. It really is the stronger format… who really cares about better fonts and smoother graphics when that’s not why I come to this site (many times a day!)
RF, you’re making a mistake here if you want this website to thrive.
I’m another member who enjoys “Classic” more than “New.” It has a nearly perfect layout, whihc allows me to browse and see the newest stories first, instead of having to jump category to category.
“Classic” viewer here. I much prefer this version, but will keep reading the website in the newfangled version. Only 2% of us? I guess I am also one of the “two or three” that listens to the podcast. In practically each podcast, mention is made that only a few listen. I wonder if that is going away, too, due to popular lack of demand?
The Flexible Despot :
In practically each podcast, mention is made that only a few listen. I wonder if that is going away, too, due to popular lack of demand?
Don’t be silly.
CLASSIC > *
don’t do it!
Likely my 5th or so post here, but I read the site daily and listen to the Podcasts. I use “Classic” all the time and will be miss its simplicity / coherence / chronological order when it’s gone.
Daily “Classic” reader here. I’m a blog junkie, so any website that gives me the option to maintain the tried and true, one-article-after-another list format wins the internet in my book.
I will miss the quickness and simplicity of the “Classic” format. I guess I can always switch to an RSS feed, but that would likely mean less clicks from me for TTAC.