101–110 of 110 posts
I like the new design, especially the more iPad-friendly article pages. But what I am most happy about with the new design is that the NYT didn't break the backdoor into reading any article behind the paywall, if you're not a subscriber. If you run into the paywall that blocks your reading an article, just fire up whatever Twitter app you use (I use Echofon), type the text of the article's headline into the search, s…
The design is overall asthetically pleasing. I just can't fucking take this trend of fixed bars molesting my vertical resolution and screwing with my habitual behavior of scanning from the top of the page down as I scroll. This site's top bar on single pages is so edgy that it's not even at the very top (a concept I've at least gotten acclimated to) and manages to blend into the actual article content due to low cont…
I like the new design, especially the more iPad-friendly article pages. But what I am most happy about with the new design is that the NYT didn't break the backdoor into reading any article behind the paywall, if you're not a subscriber. If you run into the paywall that blocks your reading an article, just fire up whatever Twitter app you use (I use Echofon), type the text of the article's headline into the search, s…
Use private browsing/incognito mode. Much easier.
Open Settings, search for "content settings", click the Manage exceptions button, and add one for [*.]nytimes.com.
If I may take a moment to whinge and whine a tad; Websites like this infuriate me because for all their "design", sites like Reddit and HN (which are basically just lists) are delivering news in a much more consumable fashion, better suited to the eating habits of the common or garden user. Who's to blame? The designers with their need to make their own mark? The suits with their demands that the business needs be me…
I like the new article pages generally, but I might need to write a userstyle to remove the position: fixed on the floating top bar.
With Stylish: @namespace url(http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml); @-moz-document domain("www.nytimes.com") { #masthead { position: relative !important; } }
How do you like the typography? I find e.g. the italic font for the headlines in the left column or the small all caps serif format of the bylines to be somewhat detrimental to readability.
I am under the impression that everything is smaller.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> the common or garden user Reddit and HN traffic is not common. It's a small share of the general population, and further, probably overlaps little with the target NYT audience whom they want to upsell to a paid subscription. I read HN; my extended family has never heard of it. This reminds me of people who are unaware of how small the combined market share is for rdio and spotify, or why networks don't abandon cabl…
Reddit gets over 100 million uniques a month. The NYT gets about 12 million. I know that the two organisations work very differently behind the scenes but as some one else here mentioned, they're both content aggregators at their core. And let's be honest, if a story is on one news website, it's on all of them so it's not like the NYT is a special place that has all the news no one else has. There's a lot of reasons…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
So they still hold on to the old train of thought of desktop users and mobile users. Shame really.
Mobile phones (via apps) are a lot more monetisable. Part of the decision may have been motivated by this (i.e. push mobile users towards the apps by limiting the responsiveness of the main website). I'm not saying I agree with this (and I don't have any real evidence that this guided the decision) but it is a possibility.