Cause ...Im not diggin it
Martha Stewart built a $100 million+ business. Pretty good living:waving:the "night time" color theme isn't as bad, but like others have said it's just to pastel and Martha Stewart Living on the shades and stuff.
trust me, it wasn't all Martha.... hahaMartha Stewart built a $100 million+ business. Pretty good living:waving:
thanks Kirk, we appreciate itLike the new skin guys
Good work :drinkup:
agreed :waving: and we do appreciate all "helpful" suggestions and/or "constructive" criticism when it comes to the new layout, color scheme, etc.trust me, it wasn't all Martha.... haha
I know you guys have seen a lot of bashing on the new design and I like the layout, it looks more modern and updated but I agree with everyone else, the color scheme needs work. I have to lower my laptop brightness just to read the site because it is so white washedthanks Kirk, we appreciate it
agreed :waving: and we do appreciate all "helpful" suggestions and/or "constructive" criticism when it comes to the new layout, color scheme, etc.
^^ Ditto! I dont post much but I do lurk..I miss the old site you should have a option to go back to the old one on the bottom of the page to change the (skin)
I like the new site, and I like the new setup and drop downs. I like the old logo though.Who ever is responsible for web design here .....
1) Use the W3C validator please. html -> http://validator.w3.org/ css -> http://jigsaw.w3.org/css-validator/
2) Give some strong consideration for using CSS drop down menu instead of JS.
Also, you should consider setting up a test site so your not making changes to/breaking a live site.
Not bashing, but it's like you went from a trade oriented professional "field" tested layout to this neutral Pinterest inspired "daytime" theme that really doesn't go along with the green grass, brown dirt, whatever else... The "night" colors aren't too bad as there is a decent contrast between everything and things look to be in their place. Maybe just some color tweaking on the "day" theme... I'm trying to like it...agreed :waving: and we do appreciate all "helpful" suggestions and/or "constructive" criticism when it comes to the new layout, color scheme, etc.
I don't know what the new site looks like, I am just making some suggestions based on what I see in the code.I like the new site, and I like the new setup and drop downs. I like the old logo though.
If you can find an install of vBulletin or WordPress that validates, or you actually take the time to make the site do so, you win the internet...Who ever is responsible for web design here .....
1) Use the W3C validator please. html -> http://validator.w3.org/ css -> http://jigsaw.w3.org/css-validator/
Speaking strictly in usability terms, and with a blend of the subjective and objective for you, Michael...we have changed the color of the heading for each post to be a bit darker...let us know if that looks better to you
thanks
The suggestion was in hope of fixing broken layout and the perpetual horizontal scroll bar. Wouldn't hurt to do full blown overhaul to get site design/layout properly coded with CSS.If you can find an install of vBulletin or WordPress that validates, or you actually take the time to make the site do so, you win the internet...
You can write valid code for all browsers. Now whether or not some browser versions will support cutting edge versions of XHTML, XML and CSS is another issue altogether.Also, make sure the membership upgrades their IE versions. Some older browsers (IE8 comes to mind) don't like some of the strictly valid code.
A.K.A quirks mode. IE 4 & 5 are notorious for being non-compliant, but you can still write valid code for them, even if you had to jump though some hoops to get some of the CSS 2 markups to work properly. Admittedly, some of those CSS workarounds made the CSS invalid, strictly speaking.most browsers will just ignore code it can not parse.
Circularly maddening, ain't it?Admittedly, some of those CSS workarounds made the CSS invalid, strictly speaking.
Yes, yes it is. Just like flash only sites, sites that don't gracefully scale to window size, inline formatting, etc........................................................................Circularly maddening, ain't it?
Why Why Why?A.K.A quirks mode. IE 4 & 5 are notorious for being non-compliant, but you can still write valid code for them, even if you had to jump though some hoops to get some of the CSS 2 markups to work properly. Admittedly, some of those CSS workarounds made the CSS invalid, strictly speaking.
actually....What are you guys computer guru's or lawncare professionals? Either way I like the look. Freshens things up a bit.
Glad the mobile version is still old and moldy. Like a favorite pair of skivvies.What are you guys computer guru's or lawncare professionals? Either way I like the look. Freshens things up a bit.