View Poll Results: Do you like the new white background?

Voters
273. You may not vote on this poll
  • No, I hate it!

    157 57.51%
  • It's okay, but the blue was better.

    88 32.23%
  • Makes no difference to me.

    15 5.49%
  • Yes, I like it.

    13 4.76%
Page 33 of 35 FirstFirst ... 23 31 32 33 34 35 LastLast
Results 481 to 495 of 513
  1. #481
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    724
    Bump Bump Bump

    WINS: @Buffalo, Oakland, Jacksonville, San Diego, Pittsburgh, Green Bay, @Detroit, Tennessee, @Chicago, @Oakland, Kansas City, @Houston, Minnesota

    LOSSES: @Indianapolis, @Kansas City, @San Diego

    2007-08 Forecast: 13-3

  2. #482
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    Honolulu, HI
    Posts
    9,043
    Quote Originally Posted by JRWIZ View Post
    Thanks for your information.
    It would be nice to have an occasional update on it opposed to once a week or so. There are alot of unhappy folks on here about the color scheme. An acknowledgment that they are indeed doing something would calm the waters a bit.

    As is stands most folks have come to the conclusion they do not care.As evdenced by the constant comments about it by those that have come to look at it.


    Once a week is occasional, isn't it?

  3. #483
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    724
    Quote Originally Posted by Jared View Post
    Once a week is occasional, isn't it?
    No offense Jared, but it's not really about the frequency of the updates, but the content. I'm pretty sure EVERYONE is still in the dark on whether they've decided to go with a different background color or not. With respect to the background color, the answers aren't really answers; they aren't even clues. For this issue, it's like they're saying "we'll see what we can do".

    They can't give a straight answer on whether they'll change the background color or not.

    WINS: @Buffalo, Oakland, Jacksonville, San Diego, Pittsburgh, Green Bay, @Detroit, Tennessee, @Chicago, @Oakland, Kansas City, @Houston, Minnesota

    LOSSES: @Indianapolis, @Kansas City, @San Diego

    2007-08 Forecast: 13-3

  4. #484
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    Grew up in Aurora! live in Seattle
    Posts
    2,280
    Bring back the blue and I will put down my banjo for a week!!

  5. #485
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    Honolulu, HI
    Posts
    9,043
    Quote Originally Posted by omac View Post
    No offense Jared, but it's not really about the frequency of the updates, but the content. I'm pretty sure EVERYONE is still in the dark on whether they've decided to go with a different background color or not. With respect to the background color, the answers aren't really answers; they aren't even clues. For this issue, it's like they're saying "we'll see what we can do".

    They can't give a straight answer on whether they'll change the background color or not.

    Maybe because he hasn't had an answer from tech on:

    Is it feasible?
    How long would it take?
    Will it affect functionality?

    I am sure there are other questions I haven't thought of. You know, Steve, and us mods, we are not software specialists. We can't go in and change things whenever we want. Even if we could, we wouldn't know what to change. There is a completely seperate team for that. So, he needs to ask relevant questions and feel comfortable with the answers before any changes happen.

    That and the fact that with the season starting, the marketing staff's plate just got really full, as in stadium and in season stuff is likley at the top of the priority list.


    PS - it's not like all the mods like the color either. Jwinn has posted his dislike for it as well.

  6. #486
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    7,648
    Quote Originally Posted by Jared View Post
    PS - it's not like all the mods like the color either. Jwinn has posted his dislike for it as well.
    Your avvy does really jump out against the white background, so that's a plus

    OMAC: one of the reaons we can't expect much more of a response than Steve is giving (which is pretty good feedback IMO) is that if he starts making commitments of what will be done, then the next stage of posts would be, "you said we would have xxxx, where is it? It's been xxxx weeks."

    Anyone that has dealt with software/web projects know that they are notorious for running very late. I read one place where something like only 25% of software projects finish on time, and around 25% wind up so behind schedule that they are cancelled, and the rest run long, but not so long that they are cancelled.

    When you consider that this make over was likely a long term project aimed to happen in the offseason leading up to the regular season (which is upon us now), and as Jared said, the marketing team is probably focused on a great many non-web things right now, and that adds up to putting Steve in a tough position when it comes to making any committments to us.

    The fact he clearly is listening and providing periodic feedback shouldn't be brushed off as nothing. I have said it before in my posts, that is something more times than not you don't see on a corporately sponsored forum.
    The human body has two ends on it: one to create with and one to sit on. Sometimes people get their ends reversed. When this happens they need a kick in the seat of the pants. --- Theodore Roosevelt


  7. #487
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Posts
    631
    I liked the old blue best. and its seems the font size is smaller now???? I think default style is best. choose what you want.

  8. #488
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Westminster
    Posts
    95

    the white is still burning my eyes

    I really do understand how software projects work. I also understand that there is a lot going on right now with the season getting ready to open. The problem is that the background is just terrible. It really hurts my eyes and I can see that I'm not to only one that feels this way. The software person in my life said that they have figured out that white backgrounds end up using more energy, wow go figure, it burns your eyes and your electric bill. So please keep us informed and maybe in the General Diss that you are hearing us.

  9. #489
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Posts
    631
    Quote Originally Posted by pnbronco View Post
    I really do understand how software projects work. I also understand that there is a lot going on right now with the season getting ready to open. The problem is that the background is just terrible. It really hurts my eyes and I can see that I'm not to only one that feels this way. The software person in my life said that they have figured out that white backgrounds end up using more energy, wow go figure, it burns your eyes and your electric bill. So please keep us informed and maybe in the General Diss that you are hearing us.
    I agree. the bright white make you squint. as far as the electric bill goes. if your using an LCD display. no. but if your using the old CRT yes. tube monitors will use higher current to produce white. I still say the default drop down box is the way to fly.

  10. #490
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Gooding Idaho
    Posts
    638

  11. #491
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Medford, MA
    Posts
    6,354
    Quote Originally Posted by fcspikeit View Post
    My eyes hate it!

    But I hate the fact we are losing our best members even more

    My not that anyone cares, is this place reminds me
    of old family restaurant that went commercial. We (most anyways)
    liked the old place with no stupid rolling ads of the 3 same fans, no advertizement for the Jay Cutler jersey or other things etc.) That stuff does not need to be pushed iMHO. If the Broncos are good, like we think they are then it will sell automatically, not by putting it in people faces constantly.
    The rolling 3 fans of the girl with the hat, the guy with his mouth open and of some others is pretty mundane.

    also after looking at a darker backgound and then coming here, the white is just dreadful.

    but the powers that be like it so they can do what they want.

    This site does not make me a bigger or less of a Bronco fan. I just enjoyed the old feel to it that is all but hey I am just a small needle in an enormous haystak

  12. #492
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    1,367
    Quote Originally Posted by Medford Bronco View Post
    My not that anyone cares, is this place reminds me
    of old family restaurant that went commercial. We (most anyways)
    liked the old place with no stupid rolling ads of the 3 same fans, no advertizement for the Jay Cutler jersey or other things etc.) That stuff does not need to be pushed iMHO. If the Broncos are good, like we think they are then it will sell automatically, not by putting it in people faces constantly.
    The rolling 3 fans of the girl with the hat, the guy with his mouth open and of some others is pretty mundane.

    also after looking at a darker backgound and then coming here, the white is just dreadful.

    but the powers that be like it so they can do what they want.

    This site does not make me a bigger or less of a Bronco fan. I just enjoyed the old feel to it that is all but hey I am just a small needle in an enormous haystak
    Actually, that kind of thing bothers me more than the white background (though I do loathe the white background), though it's hardly unique to this site retooling. The internet was created to exchange information, but unfortunately too much of it, IMHO, is now devoted to ebells and ewhistles that don't really add anything substantial. All the animated graphics in peoples sigs used to annoy me a little, but the text loaded first, so I could get all the responses, stop the download and read the stuff I came here to read instead of watching Chris Farleys Chippendale routine (I'm not saying there's anything wrong with Chris Farley; he's just not why I come to Broncomania.... )

    Unfortunately, there's now a number of banners that have to load on every page, plus various ads for merchandise down the side of the page, and it wants to load first, which is a real pain for those of us on dialup. It took five minutes to load this page. Literally; it was 1923 CDT when I hit the link and my computers clock changed to 1928 CDT right as the page finished downloading. At which point I clicked "quote" on your post and, about 10-15 seconds after 1929 CDT, the response page finished loading the ads for:

    FREE Cutler/Walker jerseys if I get thunder on my VISA,

    Sign Up For the Orange & Blue News,

    Broncos Magazine and, last but certainly not least,

    BroncosCountry.com, an ad that, under the circumstances, seems unnecessary and redundant (I have to wait for it to load anyway though).

    Of course, these are the same four ads I was just ignoring on the main threads page, but I needed to load them again for some reason....

    That may seem like an anal retentive, maybe even elitist (for all I'm an internet newb... ) objection, but multiply those five minutes times, say, half a dozen threads with subjects I'd like to examine, to say nothing of how long it would take if, heaven forbid, I actually wanted to RESPOND to something. Usually I just click on all the links, open all the new tabs, and go do something else while I wait for them to load (like play 40:00-60:00 worth of Super Football on my Atari 2600 emulator... ) but it better not be anything online, 'cos my bandwidth is spoken for several times. It would be nice if I could block images the way I can with gmail.

    In addition to all that, yes the glaring white is much harder on my eyes than the soothing blue. I learned this lesson two decades ago on my itty bitty little "laptop" Commodore 64, where I could change the screen/text to 16 different colors at will:

    Light colors like white make wretched backgrounds (though yellow is, I confess, even worse)

    The nice folks at Commodore chose a dark blue background with gray text for the very sensible reason that's the easiest to read and easiest on the eyes (solid black isn't good because the much brigther text had a tendency to blur).

    So if you don't see me around much, it's because in the time it would take me to load a dozen pages in a game day thread the game will be finished....

    EDIT: Yea for memory caches; it only took a little over a minute to load the page again after I typed out all of this. I did have to login again, because in the time it took me to type the preceding at 70wpm the site, which used to leave me logged in for days, or even weeks, logged me out again, but that's a pretty minor complaint. Or would be if I didn't have to wait a minute or two to be informed I've been logged out, then another minute or two to log back in again and have my post submitted. If it helps, I'm avoiding the new and "improved" NFL.com for much the same reason unless I just absolutely need to know a roster, schedule, stats or score.
    Last edited by Morambar; 09-08-2007 at 07:51 PM.
    SIGN RANDALL GODFREY FOR SLB AND BACKUP MLB NOW!!!
    I never wanted a sig. I still don't.RIP, D-Will and Damien Nash.

  13. #493
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Posts
    3,101
    You know what I find interesting? I see many RIVAL FANS complaining about the background. It's not just Broncomaniacs who have been here a long time.

    Regulars from other boards with lighter color backgrounds don't even find this site readable.
    You've got to know when to sack em...

  14. #494
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    Puerto Aventuras, Mexico
    Posts
    1,034
    Any news on the backround? It's been a while since I've seen anything.

    Most of the posters that didn't like it have left, or have cut their posting down significantly.

    I'm not trying to restart the fire, just wondering.

    I appreciate any response, sarcastic or not.

  15. #495
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    Louisville, Kentucky, United States
    Posts
    27,228
    Quote Originally Posted by slickdonkey7 View Post
    Any news on the backround? It's been a while since I've seen anything.

    Most of the posters that didn't like it have left, or have cut their posting down significantly.

    I'm not trying to restart the fire, just wondering.

    I appreciate any response, sarcastic or not.
    I haven't heard anything new in a while, but the response would be the same... expect something done in one form or another... but cosmetic issues will be dealt with after all the actual glitches have been (i.e. the number of 'guests' posting... It's been a nightmare for Steve and the technical staff to work on.)

    Sorry I can't be more helpful.
    Thanks, Reid!

    Click on my sig to read JetRazor's and my story. Or PM me with any questions.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •