New Homepage Feedback

[jpishgar]

The new version of our Tom's Hardware home page is up and available for beta testing by our community. If you can see it, you've been selected from our user audience to see a sneak preview of the new page style.

If you happen to spot any bugs or issues, or care to provide feedback, please do so in this thread so we can track it and respond to you.

Thanks!

 

[CompTIA_Rep]

The active forum thread is new and improved, otherwise, nothing really stands out. However, as a package, I like it.

Thanks for the hard work.

 

[tecmo34]

I like the "Tweater" feed and the "Latest Articles" scrolling banner but not a fan of the live forum feed... I would say it isn't really live based on what I just reviewed. It would be a nice feature but probably needs to be more "live"... IMO

However, I agree with CompTIA_rep... great work!! Next the forum (fingers crossed!! )

 

[Reynod]

There is no mention of me on the front page ... this is a bit disturbing ??

Seriously though the layout looks good.

 

[tecmo34]

Good point Reynod... We need a "Get to know your Tom's Team Member" box or a "Tom's Moderator Hunk of the Month" section & I want to be August

 

[randomizer]

The new identification of "hot" news topics is good. I don't think the red coloured links used before really conveyed their meaning well.

 

[randomizer]

It does, overall, seem a bit cluttered to me. I think that is due to the lack of white space and eye-catching features, as well as the fact that the headings for each section don't line up to give the page any sense of structure (the old page has mostly aligned section headings). It's a bit hard to know where to look. Often a home page has a single point where the viewer's initial attention is drawn and kept (a large image for example) for a time, but here everything is roughly the same size so nothing immediately stands out.

Upon landing on this page, one's eyes pass over the Latest News section to the Latest Articles section. The latter has images which more readily draw attention than text, and it is also the only section in the top half of the page with a grey background. Almost immediately after attention has been drawn to the articles, the Twitter feed scrolls, drawing attention to that instead. By now the reader's eyes are focused halfway down the page and lost in a sea of text and misaligned section headings.

EDIT: Oops, I had an ad blocker on. I had best talk about it without that on

What I said before about lack of section title alignment is still true. The entire page structure is almost random. However, I'll correct my statement about where attention is drawn. The large ad on the right side and the Latest Articles section draw the viewer's eyes from the beginning, meaning that they miss the News unless they backtrack to the other side of the page (and most people read LTR, not RTL). I would think that it would be better to draw the reader's attention on the left side and allow them to read naturally from LTR across the page.

 

[voicu83]

i'll never understand why you guys switched to this very ugly font. besides this, on linux it is very very very small. cba to zoom it every time i read an article and also don't want to install addons and stuff like that just for one site. your competitors are alot better at "readability"

just do this test: fresh install of ubuntu - open firefox with 3 tabs 1. tom's hardware 2. anandtech 3. xbitlabs ... you'll see what i mean

 

[Aionism]

It seems to be messier and there's less content right in front of you. I don't see the advantage to this new layout.

 

[Guest]

I absolutely hate it. The previous column layout was much cleaner and easier to read and notice things. The new setup with half columns and rows and feeds, its crowded and ugly. Why is the site being changed to begin with? If it is to integrate the twitter feed then I suggest putting it below the recent questions; and leaving the News feed and Article Columns in place.

 

[Gutbop]

Smaller article titles/pics, larger ads...

No thanks.

 

[vexos]

Did not really like it. News column on the left was the worst.

 

[Titanius]

Looks pretty much like the old site, its just re-organized...what's the point?

 

[Horhe]

It's not bad. But my question is: when will we have websites optimized for widescreen monitors? It's 2011, most people have widescreen monitors, there's no point making narrow websites where you need to abuse the scroll wheel to explore it. My laptop screen has an horizontal resolution of 1280 pixels, but only three quarters of it are used by the new site.

Also, with the new monitors (both standard and laptop screens), the pixels are smaller and smaller. Why is the font so small?

What are the web designers thinking???

 

[fakie]

I prefer the old one because I'm used to it :lol:

 

[topcms]

It will get some getting used to it.!! Seems like the icons have just changed around!!

 

[teugene]

The Latest News column shouldn't have been squeezed in the narrower left column. It should be the prominent column on the right since it's the only thing on the website that is frequently updated and the news titles are usually long(er)! Overall, it feels more cluttered due to a lack of a proper grid system. The older layout has a clear 3 columns grid which is easier for the eyes to follow, even though the layout looks outdated. To be honest, the "new" version is disappointing. There's nothing "new" in this new version!

 

[spunkyddog]

I personally enjoyed the last site as it had previously posted articles in specified - easy to access categories. Right now, the new site feels too full of text some how and doesn't "breath" too much. I also like that other past articles were laid out at the bottom which allowed me to quickly look at the topics by scrolling instead of clicking.

 

[MxM]

1) Missing Graphics section
2) It is slower
3) The moving live feed is annoying - it destructs when you try to focus on something else. There is no need to make it moving (you just made it to look fancy)

Overall do not see anything better, it is about the same, with harder to access topics, and problems mentioned above. I do not like it. Keep the existing format.

WHY change things when they work? What is your specific goal? You achieve NOTHING by new design, no better readability, no easier access. What issues you are trying to address? I do not see anything improved. Do not waste your time please, unless you have specific goal for redesign. This is redesign for the sake of redesign. IF IT WORKS, DO NOT FIX IT! (I thought you, of all sites, should know that!)

 

[arges86]

It looks nice i guess (although i didn't have an issue w/ the old layout)
Only thing, is that the "Latest News" section no longer shows a difference between visited and unvisited links. Not a huge deal, but something i was used to

 

[unknown_13]

I like the new active forum thread and the twitter updates banners. I have no major problems with the new page, it looks more polished, although it's a bit slower, but this is the beta, right?

Oh, and return the old style News section, i liked the old one much better. I don't like the titles separated like that.

 

[Chipi]

If you are going to change the layout, at least take some time to improve the way videos are embedded in articles. Make them span across the whole width of the page and use the NEW embedding code so we can change quality (without havign to go to the youtube page).

The HD "revolution" is long over, but we still can't watch HD videos on Tom's because nobody bothered to embed them properly...

 

[jpishgar]

Thanks for the feedback, everyone, and please do keep it coming. If you can, please cite specifics when making comments as it helps our development team in the review process as the new design is still in progress and your input is crucial.

It seems to be messier and there's less content right in front of you. I don't see the advantage to this new layout.

What would you recommend as an alternative? Positioning and aesthetic suggestions are welcome.

Why is the site being changed to begin with? If it is to integrate the twitter feed then I suggest putting it below the recent questions; and leaving the News feed and Article Columns in place.

Every site must undergo a periodic update to keep up with the changing environment - even the austere Google has made changes to its landing page over the past decade. We know that there will be basic resistance to the changes for posterity's sake, but we have to keep pace with how we present ourselves to our audience in general. You'd recommend switching recent questions and the Twitter feed? Which do you think you'd end up using more?

Smaller article titles/pics, larger ads...

The ads are the same size as they are now, though perhaps lined up a bit better. Will definitely pass along the suggestion on the font and iconography though.

Did not really like it. News column on the left was the worst.

What's your preference here? News module front and center?

It's not bad. But my question is: when will we have websites optimized for widescreen monitors? It's 2011, most people have widescreen monitors, there's no point making narrow websites where you need to abuse the scroll wheel to explore it. My laptop screen has an horizontal resolution of 1280 pixels, but only three quarters of it are used by the new site.

Current design specs lend towards a preference for vertical scrolling, and you'd be surprised how many users out there still wander around in 1024x768 as abhorrent as the notion sounds. With tablets flooding the market and the lines between desktop site and mobile site getting blurrier every day, I think the web is stuck for now with a given set of width standards that we have to adhere to.

Just to let you know, you don't have to switch to the new version right away, and this is being previewed to a handful of our users to get your direct feedback and make changes as recommended by our community. We're committed to working with our dedicated users and keeping you guys happy while bringing the Tom's design up to date.

Keep the great feedback coming, folks!

 

[hunter315]

It seems to be much heftier to load up, just did a speed test between the new one and the old one on my home internet(~3 Mbps), takes about 10 seconds to load up the new one all the way, most of this is the twitter feed, the old one takes about 3 seconds, this is rather significant.

One thing i did notice, i would have put both the live twitter feed and the live forum feed on the same side, and i would also make the live forum feed about half or two thirds its current size as right now its more prominent than the news articles so it seems more important which it shouldnt.

 

[qwertymac93]

I like it, the page is smaller and more to the point. I wouldn't change a thing myself. I have an idea though, how about letting people rearrange the home page with little arrows that move the modules, kinda like how youtube does it with the channels. That way people complaining about the order could just fix it the way they want without ruining it for the rest of us .