Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Preview: The New Tom's Hardware

Last response: in Site Feedback
Share
April 14, 2008 10:49:12 AM

On April 16th Tom's Hardware will sport a new look, designed to make it easier for you to find and read the articles and news you need to see. Join us for a preview of what's to come this Wednesday.

http://www.tomshardware.com/2008/04/14/new_toms_hardware_website/index.html

More about : preview tom hardware

April 14, 2008 1:39:54 PM

I see you'll still have one-page articles spread out over 29 single-paragraph pages...?
April 14, 2008 4:41:25 PM

The articles DEFINITELY need more breathing room. They are currently cramped between the left hand menu and the right hand ads area. I hope we will see wider columns used for the articles in the new site along with about a quarter or half inch of extra padding on the sides. The article columns need to be much more dominant compared to the left or right hand content.

I really don't mind that the articles are broken into several pages because it allows for a coherent breakdown in the table of contents. More often than not I won't read an entire article, but instead I will just skip to the parts that interest me.

EDIT: I've changed my mind. It would actually be nice to see at least two or three sections of an entire article on a single page. Just make sure the section titles are easily visible so users can scroll down to the particular section they are interested in.
Related resources
April 14, 2008 4:49:26 PM

Guys, I really wish you guys the best of luck in your next "version" of Tom's.

One thing I would like to see. A page with the "who is who" @Tom's. Some of the old timers probably know, but it sure would be nice for some of the newer folks.

Tom's helped my kids build out 1st DIY computer. You'll always be my #1 site :love: 





April 14, 2008 5:04:38 PM

"Nothing is ever perfect out of the shoot, so we do ask..."
That's a CHUTE, out of which nothing is ever perfect. But pedantry aside...

I'm not sure the usability has improved for people reading the articles. This preview was 17 pages long, many of them with only one sentence and a screen shot on the page! That's too much. It just takes too long to read the articles; we shouldn't have to load 17 pages to read one article. If you want to make linkable sections, fine; you could do that with the <a name> function and hop down the page.

And why, in 2008, is the page still so skinny? Aren't most of your readers using widescreen monitors? And even if not, the ones still running 1024x768 could center on the article and scroll left or right to see the menu and ads. Even just making the page 1100px instead of 980px would be a great improvement in readability (while still leaving most of the sidebars visible).
April 14, 2008 7:06:58 PM

1) This used to be my #1 site for monitor reviews but has been quiet about a year. There's a lotta cool stuff happening!

2) Forum topics should be consolidated like they used to be imo. I'm sure there was a good reason for the current categories but navigation is tedious and probably not poster-freindly (judging by a slow-down in a couple forums). Also is a communication barrier between like-minded posters.

P.S. like second take with ben and rob and spotlight (Tamara is a cutie :) )
April 14, 2008 7:44:21 PM

Tatts said:
"Nothing is ever perfect out of the shoot, so we do ask..."
That's a CHUTE, out of which nothing is ever perfect. But pedantry aside...

I'm not sure the usability has improved for people reading the articles. This preview was 17 pages long, many of them with only one sentence and a screen shot on the page! That's too much. It just takes too long to read the articles; we shouldn't have to load 17 pages to read one article. If you want to make linkable sections, fine; you could do that with the <a name> function and hop down the page.

And why, in 2008, is the page still so skinny? Aren't most of your readers using widescreen monitors? And even if not, the ones still running 1024x768 could center on the article and scroll left or right to see the menu and ads. Even just making the page 1100px instead of 980px would be a great improvement in readability (while still leaving most of the sidebars visible).


The page width, which we fight over back and forth, on the design end, is based on the reported resolution of people's browsers.

Multiple pages vs. gigantic vertical scroll is actually left to editorial to decide. The new CMS will do nothing in this regard. Letting the editors who go a little bit overboard with the page breaks will.
April 14, 2008 8:07:18 PM

Nooooo! It's going to be like the UK version isn't it? No longer will you be able to see all six headline articles at a glance and you'll have to put up with those horrible javascript replacements for the perfectly functional drop-down box.

I live in the UK but visit the US version of the Tom's site because the UK one - which has been blazing this unfortunate trail for a while now - sucks so much. Now I will have nowhere to go :( 
April 14, 2008 9:32:05 PM

bumfish said:
Nooooo! It's going to be like the UK version isn't it? No longer will you be able to see all six headline articles at a glance and you'll have to put up with those horrible javascript replacements for the perfectly functional drop-down box.

I live in the UK but visit the US version of the Tom's site because the UK one - which has been blazing this unfortunate trail for a while now - sucks so much. Now I will have nowhere to go :( 


Although the look is similar to the UK site, The design of much of the site navigation resembles a much older design on Tom's hardware. The main objective is to move much more of the content to one or two clicks from the home page.

We will NOT be using the UK style top headlines box. All headlines will be visible at all times.

Full noscript navigation will not be ready day one. I do not consider the navigation complete untill it is though.
April 15, 2008 4:03:17 AM

Ombudsman said:
The page width, which we fight over back and forth, on the design end, is based on the reported resolution of people's browsers.

Multiple pages vs. gigantic vertical scroll is actually left to editorial to decide. The new CMS will do nothing in this regard. Letting the editors who go a little bit overboard with the page breaks will.

I have to agree here completely with what tatts wrote, I've been browsing on a 1680x1050 screen since 2003 - that's five years guys, half a decade! Absolutely no need to waste all that screen real-estate. The smallest monitor HP offers today with their desktops is a 17" widescreen @ 1440x900. Translation - get with the times. You can argue that not everybody has a 30" display, but we're talking WWW here - are you going to make it dinosaur-compatible or look at what today offers/tomorrow brings???

I disagree with your argument on browser width. A well-designed and smartly-laid-out webpage will fit (and fill) the screen width when I maximize the window, but it will also wrap text properly and condense in width when viewed in window mode - exactly so that if I want two browser windows side-by-side I can read/compare two articles.

I too sometimes find it annoying when pages in articles contain maybe a single paragraph and 1-2 images - doubling the page length would not be such a bad idea.
April 15, 2008 10:08:33 AM

I'd really like it if the forums didn't take so horrendously long to load. There isn't even much on here. It's not full of high res downscaled images, yet takes forever to load anyway. Not everyone has 2.5MB/s download speeds as their budget service. Plus do we need to go through so many screens while logging in and posting?

1) *Clicks login*
2) Loads another page: "Checking your identity"
3) Loads yet another page: "You were sucessfully identified".
4) Finally loads the page I was on before.

Why can't we go from 1-4 in one go and skip the two middlemen?

The same with posting. Does it really have to load a page to tell me that I posted? If it reloads the page I posted on, I can see for myself if it posted or not. It may not seem like much, but all those extra 2-3 seconds per page of loading (sometimes more on a bad day) really slow down your ability to surf the site efficiently. If you want to streamline the site then you need to dump the extra pages.

Side note: That budget PC better have a 9600GT in it :kaola: 
April 15, 2008 1:16:36 PM

that's 4 pages of ads. Can't we just give you the money, and not have the slow loading ads?
April 15, 2008 3:50:57 PM

I really hope the pages width is dynamic and not too optimized for a single resolution.

I'm running a pair of 1680 x 1050 monitors at home and an 800 x 480 Eee PC on the go. Sadly, it feels like nearly every site I go to is too wide for the Eee and has huge empty boarders on my home desktop.
April 15, 2008 9:41:42 PM

It would be nice if the charts were updated as well. Anybody at Tom's ever hear of items such as a 9600gt? Vista? Crysis?

Finding out how the ancient Doom3 runs on newer hardware is not exactly exiting. And we are into the 4th month of "2008" you know. I think it is safe to drop the Nvidia 6 series, the ATI x8 series, etc... Folks can always look these up in the old charts.

I used to link people to these charts, but not so much any more due to their obsolescence and irrelevance.
April 16, 2008 12:53:59 AM

To retest every card takes forever. Appreciate the time it takes to create those charts. It takes a good hour to hour and a half to do Crysis benchmarks for a number of resolutions in both DX9 and DX10. Multiply that by around 15 different benchmarks, then multiply that by the number of cards and you've got yourself a few weeks worth of benchmarking to do.
April 16, 2008 1:20:16 AM

I would really like to see a single link/tab to view all the reviews performed for the last two weeks or even better month. Tom's use to have it and I am sure I would read more articles if it was back. I agree with way to many pages for an article. I do like the new print function idea.
April 16, 2008 11:51:43 AM

What is the huge blank grey space in the bottom right of the main page for? :heink: 
EDIT: Oh, ads...

And come on, even the forum section heading is IntelliTxt, this is stupid:


Sorry for the bad jpeg compression, blame photobucket
April 16, 2008 1:22:08 PM

if it aint broken dont fix it

I just got used to the 'old' site, and now this.. Now the Toms site looks like it escaped from the 90's or something... :( 
April 16, 2008 1:31:33 PM

Huh, my profile header-ma-bob doesn't have the intellitext in it. I am not being change resistant but the front page seems quite packed in. The videos at the bottom left side don’t even have enough room to show a fraction of their titles. The titles are kind of a joke if you are only going to display 9 characters of them.

Suggestion:
Run the video icons like a bullet point list and have the full titles next to the icon like this;

<Video> <title bla bla bla bla bla>
<Video> <title bla bla bla bla bla>

The list will be longer than what you have now but at least the full title of each video would be visible without having to scroll over it.
April 16, 2008 1:31:48 PM

Oh my god... it's shiny...
April 16, 2008 2:39:30 PM

Return the ammount of forum postings on the front page back to thier original number or greater.I liked that overhead view as to what was going on, now its more of a peephole.
April 16, 2008 3:39:17 PM

I miss the rolling forum threads...

And COMEON! who uses a b rowser resolution of 800X600? Get along with the times; this is a site for enthusiasts; no one here with a res lower than 1280X1024...And you can pack even more ads in here if you make it a little bigger!
April 16, 2008 3:52:00 PM

I like the hardware reviews... as they came out...
how many hardware reviews have there been for the new released motherboards...
I use to enjoy reading the several Hardware reviews a day...
now we get one or to a week if we are lucky...
it is suppose to be "Tom's Hardware" not software... if u want game reviews then go to a game review site...
if you want reviews on cars.. go to a car review site...

I use to come here a lot... but now... I find it is mostly pointless...

I don't mind the Advertising they have or the many pages to load up to read all of the review...
If there was a review worth reading...

When was the last time they did a Motherboard review... so many are getting released.. but no reviews...
once a month they release best gaming cards... but there isn't really much else...

So sad...

Perhaps they should change the website name from TomsHardware.com to mostlynonhardware.com

edit: typos
April 16, 2008 4:39:34 PM

Forums ticker anyone?
April 16, 2008 4:42:11 PM

The VGA charts SUCK.

I haven't looked at a lot of the other new changes because I'm upgrading my video card.

It WAS so easy to compare my old x850 to another card. Now it is a massive pain - bring back the old charts with the option to compare two cards. At the very least, bring back your interactive chart archive!!
April 16, 2008 4:47:06 PM

nukemaster said:
Forums ticker anyone?


word
April 16, 2008 5:52:27 PM

My opinion is the website isn't much different but the quality of the articles has gone way down. In fact the lack of competence is a complete joke. Your writers may be experts at something but it's not the technology they are writing about. Getting writer from tabloid tech sites and so on, not grounding your conclusions, the list goes on.

Wish you guys the best of luck!
April 16, 2008 7:28:43 PM

WTB the scrolling Forums topics box again.
April 16, 2008 8:47:55 PM

When I am in a thread and click on "Forums" in the top bar it brings me to the home page.
April 16, 2008 10:33:20 PM

bydesign said:
My opinion is the website isn't much different but the quality of the articles has gone way down. In fact the lack of competence is a complete joke. Your writers may be experts at something but it's not the technology they are writing about. Getting writer from tabloid tech sites and so on, not grounding your conclusions, the list goes on.

Wish you guys the best of luck!



Can you point to specific articles that aren't up to the "Tom's Hardware" standard? It would help me a great deal.

April 16, 2008 11:25:08 PM

Ombudsman said:
Can you point to specific articles that aren't up to the "Tom's Hardware" standard? It would help me a great deal.



its not that the articles aren't up to standard...
no complaints of the quality of articles... when I do read them...
more of a complaint of the content...

for example 780i motherboards have been out for a while...
no reviews on this site...

if a review was done on one board... a week later on another...
it would feed your site with more content...

then do a final comparison...

we are hardware enthusiasts...
you have articles on cars?

most of us overclock...
would be nice if there was a nice write up on it... instead of having to dig through the forums...
well that is what it use to be before it became commercialized
April 17, 2008 12:30:09 AM

I like the new layout. It'll take awhile for me to get around.

Although I am not too crazy with the light cyan color on the front page. It's too hard to read. I think black words are better for most people.

Just a thought.

Darkk
April 17, 2008 12:49:48 AM

SpinachEater said:
When I am in a thread and click on "Forums" in the top bar it brings me to the home page.
Same thing here (obviously). The URL needs to be changed to the forum home page instead of tomshardware.com
April 17, 2008 1:04:38 AM

Another vote for the scrolling forums.

Another vote for something better for the 29 page articles. Maybe a 'single page' option?

Is it just me or does the back arrow not work as expected?

Is it just me or does the site now re-connect every few seconds?
April 17, 2008 1:20:22 AM

Ombudsman said:
Can you point to specific articles that aren't up to the "Tom's Hardware" standard? It would help me a great deal.


Sure, how about the article about Vista and RAM. One of your conclusions was with 4 Gb you are better with x86. However none of the benchmark support this conclusions. I'm not even saying it's the wrong conclusion but the closest you came to grounding it was that x64 uses more RAM. Then my favorite one is the liquid cooling road-up. In this video test you tested liquid cooling mediums. The odd thing was plain H2O was omitted which should have been your baseline. Then folks out there would know how crappy premixes really perform. Sure many add additives for component protection or non-conductive solutions for safety but you need a baseline for any test. There are many others but those are two examples off the top of my head.

I also have an issue with some of the hardware test where the opposition is oddly omitted. Now if this is because vendor X imposed this requirement that's fine but in the old days that would have been pointed out.

At one time I had so much faith in the articles from Tom's that I started with the conclusion and dug deeper for what mattered to me. Now I grab the headline and Google other sites for the complete picture. I guess I was lazy but I liked the one stop shopping aspect of it.

Lastly the forums are filled with posters posting blatantly incorrect information. I'm not talking about the subjective stuff either. Best I can tell nothing is done about it, ever. Just about everyone has made a bad post before but some of this stuff is posted by someone who really doesn't have a clue and it's posted as fact. These are usually the posts asking for advice. Part of me says, well they will learn their lesson from not fact checking and corroborating the advice the other part of me feels sorry for them. There are many different approaches that can be taken on this and it's just as much a community thing as a Tomshardware issue but it needs to be addressed.
April 17, 2008 6:19:33 AM

485255,30,136863 said:
I miss the rolling forum threads...

YES! :bounce: 
April 17, 2008 6:58:40 AM

randomizer said:
I'd really like it if the forums didn't take so horrendously long to load. There isn't even much on here. It's not full of high res downscaled images, yet takes forever to load anyway. Not everyone has 2.5MB/s download speeds as their budget service. Plus do we need to go through so many screens while logging in and posting?

1) *Clicks login*
2) Loads another page: "Checking your identity"
3) Loads yet another page: "You were sucessfully identified".
4) Finally loads the page I was on before.

Why can't we go from 1-4 in one go and skip the two middlemen?

The same with posting. Does it really have to load a page to tell me that I posted? If it reloads the page I posted on, I can see for myself if it posted or not. It may not seem like much, but all those extra 2-3 seconds per page of loading (sometimes more on a bad day) really slow down your ability to surf the site efficiently. If you want to streamline the site then you need to dump the extra pages.

Side note: That budget PC better have a 9600GT in it :kaola: 


Bad Kittah, BAD!!!!! No kibbles for you!!!! :non:  :pt1cable:  ;) 

Unlike ombudsman, Im not employed by BoM, but I was around long enough before I was a mod to bitch&whine some answers out folks. So, Im going to give some answers to a bunch of questions.

1) Intelitext: or as I like to think of it 'retard-i-text'. Yet another lameass paid advert, but one with 2 functional solutions:
a) disable flash in your browser.....errr.... or quicktime. I forget which one it is, prolly flash as that tends to be the scumbag advertisers weapon of choice.
b) Opt out. Clic one of the lame retarditext ads, on the more info option, go to the parent site. NOT the advertisers site, but the actual Vibrant site. Look for the "opt out" option. Its in REALLY small text (almost like they didnt want you to find it....huh) Clic on the opt out option. Let it cycle then close the browser and reopen. Poof!!! Retarditext gone.

2) 29 page articles.....see 3) Sreen width

3) Screen width.
Quote:
"The page width, which we fight over back and forth, on the design end, is based on the reported resolution of people's browsers"

O RLY???? Well thats friggin news to me. See way back when, when BoM actually shrunk the screen width down, it had nothing to do with "reported resolutions" it was to make the site more 'mobile' friendly, i.e to display better on cell phones, PDAs etc. So they could reach a broader audiance.........and advertise to it. Same thing with the umpteen page articles....nothing to do with "editorial choices" when it was implemented.

4) Ads and retardicles: Get over it folks. It sucks, but when Omid pimped TH so he could sell it, he achieved what he wanted: a commercialized, quantity over quality, high hit rate site. And thus, he got what he really wanted.....a buyer with a big offer....BoM.

5) Text clipping, french subtitles, broken links etc: LOL....they really didnt scrub this new layout. The first time BoM changed the site, when they first bought out Omid, they (or at least Freddi) asked the mods, admins and whoever they could get to go through the new layout before it went public. This time however, like the last big update, they simply dropped it, flaws and all, into place Que Sera Sera......get used to seeing half lines of text and wonderful little pop ups like "Afficher la colonne de droite" , whatever TF that means :sarcastic: . And, if this update procedes like the last update, its going to be months before this gets squared away.

Sorry folks, thats the unofficial, unpaid, been here too long list of answers.
April 17, 2008 8:22:59 AM

You could use Adblock Plus to block IntelliTxt too :)  I'm not complaining about having IntelliTxt, I'm just saying it's stupid to have it where it is. It makes the heading difficult to read especially if you are red/green colorblind.

Wow, this ultra wide forum feels weird now. But I'll get used to it much more easily than when they made it narrower than the artistic streak of a maths PhD.

I also don't get what the "reviews" thing on the profile is all about. Are we able to submit reviews or something?
April 17, 2008 10:52:46 AM

turpit said:
Bad Kittah, BAD!!!!! No kibbles for you!!!! :non:  :pt1cable:  ;) 

Unlike ombudsman, Im not employed by BoM, but I was around long enough before I was a mod to bitch&whine some answers out folks. So, Im going to give some answers to a bunch of questions.

1) Intelitext: or as I like to think of it 'retard-i-text'. Yet another lameass paid advert, but one with 2 functional solutions:
a) disable flash in your browser.....errr.... or quicktime. I forget which one it is, prolly flash as that tends to be the scumbag advertisers weapon of choice.
b) Opt out. Clic one of the lame retarditext ads, on the more info option, go to the parent site. NOT the advertisers site, but the actual Vibrant site. Look for the "opt out" option. Its in REALLY small text (almost like they didnt want you to find it....huh) Clic on the opt out option. Let it cycle then close the browser and reopen. Poof!!! Retarditext gone.

2) 29 page articles.....see 3) Sreen width

3) Screen width.
Quote:
"The page width, which we fight over back and forth, on the design end, is based on the reported resolution of people's browsers"

O RLY???? Well thats friggin news to me. See way back when, when BoM actually shrunk the screen width down, it had nothing to do with "reported resolutions" it was to make the site more 'mobile' friendly, i.e to display better on cell phones, PDAs etc. So they could reach a broader audiance.........and advertise to it. Same thing with the umpteen page articles....nothing to do with "editorial choices" when it was implemented.

4) Ads and retardicles: Get over it folks. It sucks, but when Omid pimped TH so he could sell it, he achieved what he wanted: a commercialized, quantity over quality, high hit rate site. And thus, he got what he really wanted.....a buyer with a big offer....BoM.

5) Text clipping, french subtitles, broken links etc: LOL....they really didnt scrub this new layout. The first time BoM changed the site, when they first bought out Omid, they (or at least Freddi) asked the mods, admins and whoever they could get to go through the new layout before it went public. This time however, like the last big update, they simply dropped it, flaws and all, into place Que Sera Sera......get used to seeing half lines of text and wonderful little pop ups like "Afficher la colonne de droite" , whatever TF that means :sarcastic: . And, if this update procedes like the last update, its going to be months before this gets squared away.

Sorry folks, thats the unofficial, unpaid, been here too long list of answers.


1: The Green links, Echotopics, are not working as designed they're in the wrong places. It's being worked on.

3: Screen width: Under the new design, pages should be wider. The left hand navigation has been removed, meaning more article space. There have also been changes to the forum widths, which I'm a little surprised no one has commented on yet..

I'd rather focus on the here and now issue of "How long should the page be" on this issue, rather than the past.

4: I don't know Omid and his decisions well enough to talk to what Turpit is saying.

Bestofmedia is a very metric and proof heavy kind of company. One of the metrics is "are the users happy?". I contend that "The users like their Tom's Hardware to be hardcore. They want well written technically perfect articles based on evidence." and to prove that it's what the users want, and not just me making stuff up, I need my own evidence, such as direct feedback from the users in the forums.

Much comes down to "what gets prioritized"?

For example, the feedback is pretty overwhelming in favor if that scrolling forum thing on the homepage.

The followup I have to ask is: What elements of the scrolly thing do the users want?

In this case, I"m guessing that it's a way of getting an overview of all forums activity, without having to navigate through the forums.


5: The quality at launch of this set of updates stands on it's own merits, for better or for worse.

If this fixes on this update go like the last set of forum updates, it means I will have failed, and I should be fired from this job.

I think it would have been a good idea to show the updates to the mods. I have no idea of why it didn't happen.

I made the request to change that "Afficher la colonne de droite" thing 12 hours ago. I'm showing it fixed on my view right now.


April 17, 2008 11:55:32 AM

"Much comes down to "what gets prioritized"?

For example, the feedback is pretty overwhelming in favor if that scrolling forum thing on the homepage.

The followup I have to ask is: What elements of the scrolly thing do the users want?

In this case, I"m guessing that it's a way of getting an overview of all forums activity, without having to navigate through the forums. "

Thats it exactly,
a good overview of a wide selection from the forums not just 6 or 7 links.
this will keep the forum traffic high and not kill it off.

otherwise it just takes to long to troll through the forums to spot and interesting thread.

to illustrate the point:
i live in the uk but i always used the us .com site because of the scrolling forums section.
the uk site had the static thing just as the us one now has and i deliberatly avoided it as a result.

April 17, 2008 1:12:54 PM

Ombudsman said:


3: Screen width: Under the new design, pages should be wider. The left hand navigation has been removed, meaning more article space. There have also been changes to the forum widths, which I'm a little surprised no one has commented on yet..

Didn't you read my previous post? It's nice to be able to hide the "latest news" on the right hand side of the forum to make it as wide as possible. Thumbs up for that, should have been done a long time ago ;)  It's weird, my monitor is 4:3 but this almost feels like 16:10 now :lol: 

Now just speed up the backend so that I don't sit at the "Message successfully deleted" screen for 15 seconds :lol: 

I'd still also like to know what the "reviews" thing is in the profile box up the top.
April 17, 2008 2:35:33 PM

Ombudsman said:
3: Screen width: Under the new design, pages should be wider. The left hand navigation has been removed, meaning more article space. There have also been changes to the forum widths, which I'm a little surprised no one has commented on yet..

I posted my comment earlier, but must have put it in a different section as I don't see it here.

I dislike that the "Latest News" headlines are so long that they wrap to a second line. That in turn means that half as many headlines can be seen in one glance. I would 1) Edit those babies so they only take one line, and 2) Scroll them.

April 17, 2008 3:57:33 PM

I'm not sure I get the logic of this (actually, I'm sure I don't get the logic at all)...

The TH site is fixed at a narrow width in order to fit on a 1024x768 resolution monitor, yet it's okay for the Forums to resize dynamically. Not only that, but in the Forums (which are 1350 pixels wide on my 1680x1050 monitor), I can hide the right column to make them even wider! Running the Forums at full 1680 width is like trying to read a tennis match. I actually have to move my head from side to side--that's too wide--so I'll keep the right column visible (god, is this guy never satisfied?).

So, I don't get it. Why can we make the wide part of the site even wider but not the too-skinny part? And if it's okay for one part to resize dynamically, why shouldn't the whole site do the same?
April 17, 2008 4:06:16 PM

Two other notes about the site:
1. When I click the arrow to get the drop-down to see the many sections of a story, only the first 7 sections have a white background (thus blocking the writing underneath). All the rest are transparent, so it's hard to read.
2. The charts in the stories are good, but I wish each one had a note in the legend "More is better" or "Lower is better", etc. I know I should be able to discern it by seeing in the left legend that the scale is in MFlops or parsecs/millisecond, but the point of graphs is to give the reader a quick way to visualize comparisons, and this would make it a little easier. It's done in some graphs, but not others.
April 17, 2008 6:44:16 PM

Tatts said:
I'm not sure I get the logic of this (actually, I'm sure I don't get the logic at all)...

The TH site is fixed at a narrow width in order to fit on a 1024x768 resolution monitor, yet it's okay for the Forums to resize dynamically. Not only that, but in the Forums (which are 1350 pixels wide on my 1680x1050 monitor), I can hide the right column to make them even wider! Running the Forums at full 1680 width is like trying to read a tennis match. I actually have to move my head from side to side--that's too wide--so I'll keep the right column visible (god, is this guy never satisfied?).

So, I don't get it. Why can we make the wide part of the site even wider but not the too-skinny part? And if it's okay for one part to resize dynamically, why shouldn't the whole site do the same?



There's no single reason why something as complicated as fixed vs dynamic is put in. Dynamic, for example makes it much harder to troubleshoot, and get to look nice, because there are an infinite number of possible layouts.

I know that mobile has been evaluated. The idea that you can pull up Tom's Hardware on your phone as you are in the aisles at your local computer store has merit, but a decision like this is not only going to be made on that issue..

I don't think it's too much of a shocker that the designers wanted to try dynamic sizing on only one part of the website, rather than put it everywhere.

Is the site better in terms of width? Are the layout glitches worth it?
April 17, 2008 8:40:48 PM

Hi,

Very bad news concerning this acquisition by "Best Of Media"

Fusion, Acquisition or whatever are all time bad for customer.
I HATE monopoly.

Just look now how practically all paper news, paper magazine, have same proprietor, owner.

To have power I will not permit any Fusion, Acquisition.
It's just good to Rich and bank.

So I think Tom's Hardware will be less good soon and many people will lose their job cause "restructuration".

Capitalist is c**p but 99% of people love it. The 1% dream to Communist, which is c**p too.

It's pity TM sale his soul.
But all Companies do that today.

:( 



April 17, 2008 9:03:31 PM

Forum stuff:
Forum options' signature box is too tiny to do anything.
Also, is there ways to remove the personal profile thing up top?
Can we have a checkbox in the quick reply section to disable signature for the post.


Website stuff:
With only 10 forum threads listed on the front page, it seems like there is no point having it on the front page any more. More posts or remove it. It is a waste of space right now.
Wider page option please.
It is Tom's HARDWARE. I would rather see more hardware stuff listed on the front page instead of being a portal. I've said my word about how much the old front page sucked. New one is even worse. I guess I'll just change my bookmark to tomshardware.com/review then.
April 18, 2008 12:28:07 AM

I typically take a look at Toms hardware at night these days on a P4M 2.0ghz cheapo laptop with 1gb of ram. With the new format change, I've noticed massive increases in processor usage and some downright silly behavior. I run Firefox 2 with Noscript installed and I can see the many many piles of junk that also load with the tomshardware pages which is a major frustration in itself. However to use the article pulldowns (to go to another page in the article) I now have to allow the base site in addition to bestofmedia... it would be convenient if such basic function was a component of the base domain so that I don't have to spend time diagnosing what to unlock just to see tomshardware pages. Also, tomshardware is now one of the very few sites that simply bogs this older laptop down completely, chewing its battery up.

Does tomshardware and the associated sites really need to run such intensive and inefficient content? I can watch video laden or heavily intensive multimedia sites that are not as hard on this laptop. My suggestion would be to work on making the code for this site more efficient and to cut down on additional crap content for users of less powerful & mobile machines. Yes, of course I have more powerful laptops and some very powerful multi-processor multi-monitor machines but I don't think that is an excuse for a website that bogs down older hardware. It seems to me that as the tiny web browsing machines like the eepc, olpc, cell phones, etc become more popular that tomshardware and its sites should be simplifying rather than bogging down simpler hardware.

I enjoyed the site 2 revisions ago when it actually linked directly to reviews and content as well....
!