Irony has gone too far when you're writing an article explaining how your ironically bad and retro web design is good, actually.
Replying to comments about our web page design
131–140 of 211 posts
Re: Replying to comments about our web page design
#132Re: Replying to comments about our web page design
#133Couldn't actually read for very long. The content scrolling over the static background image gave me motion sickness. The 1980s theme was the only one I could stand, and the 1990s theme appears to be the same as the Tropical Days theme. All the ones with the background are essentially unusable for me. It's their site, they can do whatever they want, but it's a bit silly to act like there's something wrong with anyone…
Re: Replying to comments about our web page design
#134Couldn't actually read for very long. The content scrolling over the static background image gave me motion sickness. The 1980s theme was the only one I could stand, and the 1990s theme appears to be the same as the Tropical Days theme. All the ones with the background are essentially unusable for me. It's their site, they can do whatever they want, but it's a bit silly to act like there's something wrong with anyone…
Re: Replying to comments about our web page design
#135Couldn't actually read for very long. The content scrolling over the static background image gave me motion sickness. The 1980s theme was the only one I could stand, and the 1990s theme appears to be the same as the Tropical Days theme. All the ones with the background are essentially unusable for me. It's their site, they can do whatever they want, but it's a bit silly to act like there's something wrong with anyone…
On Firefox, you can just prepend "about:reader?url=" to any web page and you get the plain-text reader view. There's apparently a config setting in the userChrome.css file to make reader available like this on all sites.
Some sites have it in the address bar, but I've never found any documentation from MS that makes it clear how to ensure that it is always there.
Re: Replying to comments about our web page design
#136I think it's cool! I applaud them trying something different. There's too much groupthink and too little creativity / humanity in modern design - 90s mainstream UIs, for all their faults, at least had a little fun and soul.
Re: Replying to comments about our web page design
#137Per original link >>Arghhhh! Your pages give me a headache, and/or eyestrain. >Stop using the site immediately and consult a qualified ophthalmologist. Seriously, no static display on a modern and correctly adjusted VDU such as a computer monitor or phone screen should ever be inducing headaches or eyestrain in a healthy individual when properly used for reasonable time periods, and with sufficient breaks. If it is,…
They do provide reasonable contrasts for all text on the page.
The text is a reasonable size.
Which is honestly better than most websites, especially technology sites.
That said, it would be nice if they supported readers though, or directly linked to their "gem text" (pure ascii) site. Putting blame on the browsers for the site's design choices is lazy.
Re: Replying to comments about our web page design
#138Per original link >>Arghhhh! Your pages give me a headache, and/or eyestrain. >Stop using the site immediately and consult a qualified ophthalmologist. Seriously, no static display on a modern and correctly adjusted VDU such as a computer monitor or phone screen should ever be inducing headaches or eyestrain in a healthy individual when properly used for reasonable time periods, and with sufficient breaks. If it is,…
Re: Replying to comments about our web page design
#139Couldn't actually read for very long. The content scrolling over the static background image gave me motion sickness. The 1980s theme was the only one I could stand, and the 1990s theme appears to be the same as the Tropical Days theme. All the ones with the background are essentially unusable for me. It's their site, they can do whatever they want, but it's a bit silly to act like there's something wrong with anyone…
> I find the snark about it off-putting Same. I think this is one of those things where they were having some fun, and then some people on the Internet overreacted with great hyperbole, and so they're issuing this response to those people, but I'm sitting here reading it and it feels aggressive, and I think, "Wait, what did I do? I'm just sitting here not bothering anybody", and it begins to feel like a low-level con…
Re: Replying to comments about our web page design
#140I've always liked ExoticSilicon's design, but not until this post did I realize their smart bit of CSS for default font size: font-size: min(max(1em, 1.3vw), 1.3em); Which explains why it looks just right on my high-DPI Chromebook even though I haven't configured a big enough default font size for the browser. This is going to be the default font-size for all of my websites now (preceded by a fallback for maximum com…
If you want it to be even more readable you could do the following: font-size: clamp(1em, 1.3vw, 1.3em); I would also consider using `rem` instead of `em` incase you want to use it anywhere other than the root element.
This is a good write up of using clamp and fluid type