I for one like it, I think it does a good job of providing an 'at-a-glance' overview of stories, it fits a good number of stories on one screen (20) and it is suitably uncluttered for my aesthetic tastes. The only thing I would change is have the animation effects a little faster, say 25%, just to increase the 'snappiness' factor a little. A good job well done IMHO.
Experimental New York Times Interface
11–20 of 40 posts
Re: Experimental New York Times Interface
#12Good step forwards towards interaction. Some more things that could make it a killer: * Graceful degradation for noscript; maybe do a simple CSS fallback option. * The page-slide animation is eye-candy but IMHO with time it might get annoying, make it optional. * It shouldn't be hard to add an X on top-right corner of boxes to remove or shade things you read already. * Some killer fonts, it's the New York Times!
re: 'killer fonts'
I can't imagine it'd be too hard to include server-side fonts akin to stylesheets in the HTML header of sites. Ok, the major obstacles are:
1) Browsers need to support the functionality
2) Operating system-specific font rendering
Re: Experimental New York Times Interface
#13Good step forwards towards interaction. Some more things that could make it a killer: * Graceful degradation for noscript; maybe do a simple CSS fallback option. * The page-slide animation is eye-candy but IMHO with time it might get annoying, make it optional. * It shouldn't be hard to add an X on top-right corner of boxes to remove or shade things you read already. * Some killer fonts, it's the New York Times!
re: 'killer fonts' I can't imagine it'd be too hard to include server-side fonts akin to stylesheets in the HTML header of sites. Ok, the major obstacles are: 1) Browsers need to support the functionality 2) Operating system-specific font rendering Wouldn't this really open up the possibilities for web designers?
IE 4.0+ (yes, four-point-oh), Firefox 3.1+, Opera 10+, and the latest Safari builds all support @font-face.
Re: Experimental New York Times Interface
#14Good step forwards towards interaction. Some more things that could make it a killer: * Graceful degradation for noscript; maybe do a simple CSS fallback option. * The page-slide animation is eye-candy but IMHO with time it might get annoying, make it optional. * It shouldn't be hard to add an X on top-right corner of boxes to remove or shade things you read already. * Some killer fonts, it's the New York Times!
> Graceful degradation for noscript
> The page-slide animation is eye-candy but IMHO with time it might get annoying, make it optional.
The page is utterly useless without JS. I keep JS turned off. It's a good thing I read here about the animation eye candy before trying to turn it on to explore the NYT page. Side-to-side movement on a screen gives me brain seizures. If NYT sticks with this new plan, that will be yet one more site that's off limits to me.
If I want movement and eye candy with my news, I can turn on the TV.
Re: Experimental New York Times Interface
#15It's not bad, but I believe it would be much clearer if every article had 'category' icon instead of a photo. At the moment it takes to long to filter information overhead.
Re: Experimental New York Times Interface
#16A bit too much information in one page... Too many columns, but that's just a personal opinion.
I agree, for an "Article Skimmer" using a grid layout was not the best choice as it kinda hampers skimming through the news...
It reminds me of http://oursignal.com. Maybe that's why I am having hard time with it. Except for the lead story, all articles have the same size square and color. Lack of visual anchor makes hard to read.
Re: Experimental New York Times Interface
#17I for one like it, I think it does a good job of providing an 'at-a-glance' overview of stories, it fits a good number of stories on one screen (20) and it is suitably uncluttered for my aesthetic tastes. The only thing I would change is have the animation effects a little faster, say 25%, just to increase the 'snappiness' factor a little. A good job well done IMHO.
Ditto.
Any idea where to access that mode from the traditional NYT frontpage?
Re: Experimental New York Times Interface
#18Why do the newspapers think they have to reduce themselves to news feeds?
I like the physical newspaper for the editorial value it provides: it places emphasis on certain stories (by making them larger and more accessible) and demotes others. This is real value, that I am willing to pay for.
The new interface makes almost every story identical.
Now, on the internet we have plenty of news feeds, and very few entities who can actually provide that editorial value. So I just can't understand why The New York Times would want to get rid of its biggest competitive advantage?
Re: Experimental New York Times Interface
#19I for one like it, I think it does a good job of providing an 'at-a-glance' overview of stories, it fits a good number of stories on one screen (20) and it is suitably uncluttered for my aesthetic tastes. The only thing I would change is have the animation effects a little faster, say 25%, just to increase the 'snappiness' factor a little. A good job well done IMHO.
Ditto. Any idea where to access that mode from the traditional NYT frontpage?
I don't think you can (yet?), but its was linked to from NYTimes blog for new features and announcements.
http://firstlook.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/02/13/sunday-browsin...
Re: Experimental New York Times Interface
#20The problem at the New York Times isn't the "Interface" it's their socialist, anti-capitalist, and anti-american political agenda.