Redesign In Effect

Changing up the layout around here. There may be some little wackiness as it fully comes into being. Let us know what you think of the new look and whether there’s something that needs fixing. P.S. The next button will be coming back sometime later.

Comments

Edit Your Comment

  1. kaikhor says:

    So far, I’m not impressed. I miss my old layout! Will have to see when you are finished, though.

  2. magic8ball says:

    Bleah. I liked the previous one better.

  3. faust1200 says:

    Me likey. It seems more content is able to fit on one page and the information is more uniformly placed i.e. author of article, etc. The login at the top seems more intuitive also.

  4. lawnmowerdeth says:

    I like it. Seems more streamlined and easier to follow.

  5. tcp100 says:

    -Lack of the ability to go back to stories other than what’s on the front page is a big one, I’d say. You know, the old “next / previous” buttons that were on the bottom of the home page. Am I missing something where that is now?

    -I liked “last comment by”. This let us serial F5’ers know if a topic had been updated without having to remember comment counts. Some of us are having a slow work day.

    -In general (and this was the old design), I think the linking to internal tags instead of the relevant mentioned websites in articles is a mistake. The tags should be separate, at the bottom of the article – links within the article, say to a dell site or mentioning a new site (such as the Zafu article) should link to that site, not a tag for “jeans”. (I find site tags pretty useless in general, IMHO. That’s what search is for.)

  6. superlayne says:

    Everything is horizontal…

  7. rmz says:

    Heh, I saw the new design about half an hour ago but no post or comments about it, so I wondered if I was hallucinating.

    @tcp100: A few of the articles on the main page indicate “last comment by,” and it even gives a snippet of their comment itself. For some reason it doesn’t do that for every article, though…

  8. l951b951 says:

    I like it. My laptop runs on 1600×1200, so I always had wasted white space on the right hand side. Thanks for fixing it. Although now my Treo will have fits trying to display it. Any plans for a mobile.consumerist.com?

  9. markymags says:

    I like how the site looks more structured. I also like how, as was mentioned by Faust, the front page seems to fit more content.

    Listing a snippet of the last comment is an interesting idea.

  10. Skeptic says:

    Don’t like it.

    The it seems like front page segments have less text.

  11. Tristan Smith says:

    @tcp100: I totally agree with you. I dont like purely internal links.

  12. Uriel says:

    WOW! you’re changing up the layout?! For a second when I logged on there, I thought I was Jesus!

  13. lordbeef says:

    People don’t like change. They want things to stay the same but somehow get better!

    Personally I think the redesign is pretty nice though I’ll have to play around with it some and get used to it

  14. freakinalex says:

    Uh…maybe it’s just me, but I’m not seeing a link to the next page anywhere on the main page…

  15. 44 in a Row says:

    This is fine for home, but when I’m at work during the day, I don’t have a widescreen monitor, which means that I have to do a lot of scrolling back and forth. Also, things aren’t rendering right in Firefox; I’ve got an overlap between the headline and the right-side info box (dateline, byline, comments, etc.) on the Dell story, for example.

  16. aishel says:

    I like the more condensed look.

  17. RonDiaz says:

    I liked the old design better myself.

  18. Gloria says:

    I like it. Nice, streamlined, clean.

  19. ribex says:

    Uh, how do I get to the next page to catch up on older stories I missed???

    Otherwise, I like it so far.

  20. acambras says:

    When you last changed the design (biggest change being black to white background), I hated it. But then I got used to it. Guess I’ll get used to this too.

  21. Ben Popken says:

    @ribex: The next button will take a little while to show up, but it should be there by tomorrow morning.

  22. etinterrapax says:

    But now I can’t tell whether I’m reading Consumerist or Jezebel.

  23. juri squared says:

    @etinterrapax: That was my thought exactly!

    I do like the layout, even if it is apparently using much Jezebel’s CSS.

  24. homerjay says:

    Why does everything have to change? It made Gizmodo much harder to read when they did it last week, and its not gonna help any here.

  25. Gizmodo screwed their site up to the point where I only read the RSS feed now – and now you guys are doing it too?

    Come ON. Can’t you leave a good thing alone?

  26. same shit, different shade.


    [www.tian.cc]

  27. Deusfaux says:

    You know what all the gawker sites needs? Some way to mark where you last read up to, and then on the next visit start from that point and read from oldest to newest again.

    Blog format always puts newest at top and often results in reading updates or follow up articles before the original ones if oyu havent been reading every other hour

  28. PKnel says:

    I sort of like it and sort of don’t. I like that I can now see the author of the article without having to click the read more link you guys like to put after one sentence but I don’t like how sometimes can’t see the seperation between posts. Other than that it’s alright but the photos appear smaller.

  29. junkmail says:

    I said it last time, and I’ll say it again… I fear change…

  30. conformco says:

    Ugh. It’s ugly, and just too “table-y” looking – make it’s kind of difficult to read. IE, column for content, column for title/time stamp. Meh. Plus it looks like the new Gizmodo site – which isn’t a good thing. I already found myself steering clear of Gizmodo the past few days, guess I’ll do the same here – or just look at it all in Netvibes. Blech.

  31. Dustbunny says:

    Meh. It’s harder to read — the print and pics look smaller and I have to squint to read it.

  32. RoMo says:

    I agree with TCP 100 – it would be nice to be able to go back to previous day’s stories. Even before the redesign, I often wished for some type of “calendar” archive, where I could select a certain day and view all posts. Great site anyway, just would like to see more of it.

  33. kidnextdoor says:

    I don’t like the smaller headlines. Big headlines work much better with me and my ADHD…

  34. kidnextdoor says:

    @@conformco: Yeah, Gizmodo lost me forever last week when they thought that showing a squirrel catapult was funny and/or a cool gadget

  35. BillyShears says:

    Note to Gawker:
    Next time you take a whole wrecking ball to your UI, do some usability testing before launching.

    This is really jarring, and the constant tweaking isn’t helping me adjust any.

  36. leftistcoast says:

    Change is scary. I need my binky…

    In all seriousness, though, I don’t dig on the new smaller headlines…Are you slowly inching toward Fark/Digg postings? Seriously, if you’re not going to ramp up your editorial staff by 1000% and post about 10x more content immediately you should roll it back.

  37. ronaldscott says:

    You broke the nifty Nested Comments greasemonkey script. Good work. Now they’ll have to rewrite it. Why doesn’t Gawker support nested comments, anyways?

  38. gamble says:

    People frequently have a negative response to change and I’m no different. That being said, the new font is difficult to read. Also, I’m not a fan of how the commenters’ names are off to the side. Also, comment nesting is gone?

  39. Lula Mae Broadway says:

    Not you guys too! The new Gawker look sux! Lifehacker did it first, thank God Defamer’s holding out.

    Much easier to breeze by articles and not read them. I read exponentially less on Lifehacker since the change.

    Tighter on the page does not = better.

    Fie! Fie! and Feh!

  40. jeff303 says:

    Put me down with the “new headlines and photos too small” group. Also I think that the comment data (poster, time, reply button) should be aligned to the top of each comment section, not the bottom.

  41. LatherRinseRepeat says:

    This new layout is worse than the previous. Who ever is doing the layout/CSS for the Gawker sites needs to go back to school.

  42. elavender says:

    I’m with the majority here: I don’t like the change. It may take some time to get used to but the columns for stories are extremely uneven and appear very odd. I’d recommend Gawker to read the comments in this post, as they are all very helpful. We’re the readers, and I think our opinions are just as important.

  43. magic8ball says:

    Sorry, my initial reaction wasn’t very specific (but it was very honest!) The page looks too cluttered now – I liked the bigger headlines. Also, I know this is really petty, but the commenters’ names are in all caps now, which makes them look all shouty. And apparently I’m Very Old and Easily Confused, because I get confused by the internal links in the text – when I see a link in the front-page text, I kind of expect it to go to an outside site that has more information.

  44. rlee says:

    I like it. Even on my bog-standard laptop, with bookmarks sidebar, I don’t lose anything except the end of the longest (over 12-15 chars) logins. (This, in contrast to an earlier design where ends of _articles_ were not visible.) It’s a more efficient use of space overall, and still quite readable. I agree that aligning comment data with the top would be an improvement.

  45. enthreeoh says:

    Can you toss up a vote or something? I really liked the old design myself. I even prefered the old design for Gizmodo and hoped it wouldn’t make it’s way here :/

  46. Crazytree says:

    I’M SCROOGE MCNASTY, YOUR WORST NIGHTMARE READER.

    Gotta say, love the redesign… fits a lot more stuff on the front page!

    :P

  47. TSS says:

    Aesthetically, I prefer the old layout.

    However, I’m really happy that I can actually see the comments without having to do that whole reload-stop-before-it-fully-reloads thing I’ve been doing. So thumbs up on that part.

  48. ardneh says:

    The new design really doesn’t do anything for me one way or the other. (The old black layout was my favorite)
    Re: the (now missing) next button.
    since you guys are messing with it, is there any way to clarify that ‘next’ means chronologically earlier entries, and ‘previous’ means chronologically later entries? Every single time I get to the bottom of the page I have to think about which one I need to click. (and, being an idiot, I usually guess wrong)

  49. markedward says:

    I prefer this new look compared to how it was before. I’m kind of a minimalist guy: before I had to scroll for, like, eight years to reach the bottom of the main page, and sometimes I could even get a bit mixed up as to what portion of an article I was reading if I happened to scroll too far. The shorter synopses, smaller preview images, and quick extra info on the right side is definitely an improvement to the somewhat cluttery views that were there yesterday.

    The only thing more I would ASK to have changed, though, is that flipping obnoxiously bright red in the top corner. Seriously… putting that bright of a red on a changing black/gray/white backdrop can be pretty harsh on the eyes. Find a little bit more of a desaturated color, or put a straight outline around the word so my eyes don’t play tricks on my brain.

  50. TPIRman says:

    I hate the new Gawker Empire look, too. It doesn’t really fit more content on the front pages, it just packs more headlines in by shortening everything to a paragraph summary with a “more” link. The real benefit to Nick Denton et al., is that the new design forces readers who want the whole story to click through to the single-post page, whereas under the previous design, the majority of posts would display on the front page. Translation: more clicks, more pageviews, more ad $$$.

    That said, all of the Gawker blogs provide a full-content RSS feed free of charge, which is more than I can say for a lot of the sites I read. So as far as I’m concerned, they treat the loyal readers quite well.

    Reading in RSS, I usually only click through to a post page to read the comments. On that note, the comments look terrible in Safari — there is almost no spacing between the lines, causing the letters to stack on top of each other. I’m guessing that this CSS glitch is an artifact of the conversion process (and will go away when the redesign is fully in place) because other sites with the “Gawker 3.0″ layout don’t have this bug. Might want to check that out, though.

  51. Major-General says:

    Don’t like it. It looks to me a little busier.

  52. robotprom says:

    I’m surprised no one has said “You’ll get over it.”

  53. Slytherin says:

    I like it, too. More streamlined as lawnmowerdeth said.

  54. Thassodar says:

    I don’t like it. I noticed it on Gizmodo awhile ago, and knew it was coming. Still don’t like it though. I don’t think the Kotaku fans will either.

  55. VA_White says:

    I vote no as well. Too cluttery. Too small. Too horizontal.

  56. acambras says:

    Can you make something that will help keep us surreptitious workplace websurfers out of trouble?

    Maybe something that looks like an innocuous spreadsheet. ;-)

  57. DCvision says:

    nope.. don’t like it one bit… bring back the larger cat pictures….

  58. cindel says:

    I like it.

  59. stevemis says:

    [consumerist.com]

    … is a page without the main content.

  60. Bay State Darren says:

    Will nested comments work consistently now?

  61. catskyfire says:

    It’s a lot harder to read. The font seems smaller (yes, I know, i can increase the size in my browser, but then I go to any other site, and have to readjust it back. Since I hit consumerist multiple times a day, that can be a huge pain).

    I kind of liked the large space dedicated to the stories. While more information can be crammed in here, it’s easier to skim over it.

  62. allstarecho says:

    Looks as bad here as it does on Gizmodo.

  63. Ponygirl says:

    DO.NOT.WANT.

  64. DrTweeker says:

    Where’s my next/prev links? The single post page is whack, jack.

    I don’t like the new layout – but i suppose those advertising click throughs have more pull than us readers. heh – someone should write a letter to the consumerist… you know that site where they tell about companies screwing over the ‘lil guy – you know the one. I bed they’d do a post about it.

  65. Pheos says:

    Everythings a lot smaller and closer together making it harder to read. The information on the right is a good idea but its sometimes hard to tell what post it belongs to. Perhaps it should be at the top of the post just under the title?

  66. Deusfaux says:

    this new layout is only using up half the width of my browser window. and by browser window is only just over half of my screen.

    its a huge swath of ugly blank white space. variable width please!

  67. MrFalcon says:

    UGH

    I love the content from your site, but what on EARTH have you done to your look/interface? The blurbs w/ each story are nowhere near long enough to get your snarkiness across along with information about the story. The looks seems more like you’re trying to cram far too much into the screen, much less the page. The small graphics, while perhaps a cost saving initiative for bandwidth, looks *terrible* compared to the larger images from before. I really enjoyed the look and feel of a site that seemed like it was designed for me personally, this new look makes me feel like I’m just one more peon looking at some incredibly broad focused website worth only the occasional glance down the page. I miss the meat of the old posts! I miss the look and friendliness! This is the look and feel that KILLED the Giz for me, and makes me want to finally join the 21st century and start using an RSS reader…after all, if I don’t enjoy my experience of the site…why go to it?

  68. ElizabethD says:

    I see where you’re going with the design, but as a print editor who is visually oriented, I miss the larger pics… and you guys are genius at picking them. :-) Is there a compromise?

  69. cflury says:

    Out with the new, in with the old. I don’t like the new layout!

  70. Kaien says:

    I dislike the new look. It makes it less appealing to read. I have a widescreen monitor and there’s this huge white spot to the right side nearly 40% of the screen is white on the right side with the text crunched in, off-center to the left side. It just doesn’t look great. I miss the old center aligned style with proper fitting in and I only had about 20% white screen filling. Now, it is 60% white filling with the 20% on the left and then 40% on the right.
    I also can’t check out archived stories, I’m either missing the link or it just simply isn’t there.
    I hope kotaku doesn’t switch to this either, but it isn’t possible to replace a great site like this…

  71. David Millar says:

    I like the look of the comments now, but the main page is a bit iffy and cluttered and I really miss the old logo up in the corner since I always used to click there to go to the main page and now it’s small and hard to click. Also, the main page design gets really crappy when you post big images. Just try to prevent horizontal scrolling. HS-ing = fail.

  72. Lunaris says:

    This is the layout that made me stop surfing to Gawker in the afternoons.

    The entire front page looks like nothing more than a partial RSS feed, giving me no reason at all to visit the actual site any longer. Sorry guys, you’re relegated to Google Reader now, right next to Lifehacker. At least there I can read more than two sentences without needing to click on a cut.

    Also? In my Firefox all the masthead text is on top of the graphic making it impossible to read. Good job on that, Gawker Media.

  73. Moosehawk says:

    I don’t like it. It’s too small, the titles don’t catch my attention easily enough, it’s too spacey, the comments just look weird for some reason. The “By:/At:” over on the right side is too far away from text.

  74. Most of the changes I think I just need to get used to but I agree with Moosehawk that the BY/AT is too far away from the comment. You have to “look for” who made comments now instead of seeing it immediately.

  75. The Bigger Unit says:

    Since Lifehacker changed to the same layout a week or two ago, I’ve literally found myself reading their site less due to the less-pleasing layout. I wonder how my eyes will judge the Consumerist change as well??

  76. Toof_75_75 says:

    @Moosehawk:

    Agreed…Do not want!

  77. tvh2k says:

    I like it, more on a page and takes advantage of wider screen resolutions.

  78. RoCJester says:

    I like it as well, it seems more readable to me, and it’s just something different.

  79. edgesmash says:

    Add me to the “Do not like it” list. The “Morning Deals” section now has a jump? That’s just weak formatting to get more ad impressions.

  80. DXDawg says:

    Old design FTW!

  81. Vicky says:

    do not want!

    In a move I am sure that Consumerist would approve philosophically, I stopped reading Lifehacker when they switched to this design. On my laptop monitor the screen is 40% whitespace on the right and I have to click-through for content that used to fit on the main screen. How is this more usable?

  82. Morgan says:

    I already posted under the Morning Deals post, but I thought I’d also stick here that I agree with edgesmash; it’s silly to have to click through to read all the Morning Deals. I want more information before the jump, not less.

  83. MeOhMy says:

    Oh I thought there was just one crappy morning deal!

    Yeah that’s bad.

    For the most part I think it’s fine, but it seems like some articles show up with no headline and no slug…currently there are 4 such articles on the front page and you just blow right through them without noticing them.

  84. alpha says:

    The new design sucks. I think things are laid out worse, everything that should be eye-catching is less eye-catching, and…yeah. it sucks.

    And at least in IE 6 (go work for locking down the computers and only letting us use the “best of the best”: internet explorer), the comment text often runs into the “BY whoever” block of text.

  85. bluemeep says:

    I much preferred the old style. Everything in this one seems so condensed and haphazardly placed… The worst offender in that respect is having the commentor name and date to the right of their post. Maybe it’s just because it’s breaking an old standard, but it just doesn’t look right having it placed there instead of at the top beside the avatar icon. It’s really messing with me.

    The “last comment” bit is nice I’ll admit, but the rest of it… Meh.

  86. anothersmurf2 says:

    I hate that you don’t show the entire article on the front page anymore… that means I’ll have to do an insane amount of clicking to get the same content I used to get all on one page.

    The new design is too wide for my browser, but the text itself is readable without scrolling; it’s not a big deal if the headline goes off to the side, or if I can’t see who made a post. Not a big deal though.

    I like how compact the comments are now. I’d have to scroll to the side to see who posted a particular comment, but it’s rare that I care about that so I don’t mind the information being hidden.

  87. Vicky says:

    I just noticed the “last comment” bit that’s been mentioned here. That is indeed nice, but it is only showing up correctly on one of the posts on the front page for me. Firefox 1.5.0.12 on Win XP.

  88. Negative says:

    I hate the new layout. Everything seems so crowded now. I’d rather have the old one or at least some sort of compromise between the two.

  89. MonkeyMonk says:

    Overall I like the new layout a lot w/ a few suggestions.

    I’d like to see a it more of each article on the main page without having to hit the “More” button.

    Also, the default font for the comments is hella ugly and really hard to read. Any way to loosen up the line leading?

  90. Xkeeper says:

    I prefered the previous layout. It was a lot more spacious, and I use a really tiny browser window — that should tell you something.

    The new one just looks really, really awkward and, well, not Consumerist.


    Hey, there’s an idea, Gawker. Allow users to pick which one they want to use! Everybody wins!

  91. Sudonum says:

    HATE IT!!!
    I hate not being able to see who the poster is while scanning comments, and the font is too hard to read.

  92. pestie says:

    Ugly, ugly, ugly! The old layout was much nicer. And what’s with capitalizing everyone’s user ID?

  93. Soultrance says:

    Don’t like it at all. I didn’t like it when Lifehacker switched over to this look and I don’t like it for the Consumerist either.

    The old layout was far superior and a heck of a lot more original than this layout. Now the site is just Lifehacker with different content, yawn.

  94. joemono says:

    The link to view all the comments by a particular user does not work properly on the front page.

    Example:
    “Latest by dbeahn” — clicking on dbeahn goes to view comments by bnet41.

  95. matukonyc says:

    Horrible font.

  96. Tallanvor says:

    Ugh. I pretty much stopped reading Lifehacker after they switched to this layout. It’s so much more difficult to figure out what’s what now, and it feels really cluttered.

    Not a fan of the new look at all.

  97. matuszek says:

    The font is indeed narsty. I don’t have Lucida Grande, and Tahoma seems to have very bad kerning at this point size.

    Dare I suggest that a consumer-oriented web site should respect the user’s browser preferences, and just use “sans-serif” instead of forcing a font?

  98. Trae says:

    My god… this looks absolutely HORRIFIC.

    It’s very difficult for my eyes to follow, and just feels cluttered.

    Even the hideous original red/white/black look from back in the day was better than this. You guys had a decent template – and now you’ve broken it.

  99. enthreeoh says:

    throw up a vote please so we can go back to the old design…

  100. insightpatch says:

    Yeah, this isn’t a great design, not yet at least. With a little more space between headlines, better distinctions between Consumerist content and in-network content, and uniformity concerning where titles are placed within the front-page view of the article, this COULD be good.

    By the way, what’s up with the new favicon?

  101. benko29 says:

    New design is nice, except for the list on the bottom. I’m less inclined to read posts if I have to judge them by their title and click through. Much rather see the entire posts (save for long “after the jump” click-through ones).
    Same goes for the rest of the Gawker blogs that have adopted this design. Gizmodo in particular, since there’re so many damn posts there.

  102. ingridc says:

    The new design is easy on the eyes–TOO easy on the eyes. You’re wandering dangerously close into Digg/Fark/RSS/”Big Impersonal List o’ Stuff” territory. As others have mentioned, I preferred being able to read a large part (if not all) of each article without having to hit “More”. Plus the different sized fonts for various post titles is confusing. I’m looking at it now and I’m getting annoyed.

    Also, I run AdBlockPlus, and now that the commenter info is in a separate column, the layout looks wonky. And I really don’t like to disable my ABP. Surely The Consumerist can empathize!

    I’ll say that the one thing I do actually like is the headlines of archives on the bottom of the main page. Overall, however, this new design is so much less appealing to visit (i.e.- I kind of hate it).

  103. ingridc says:

    ACK!!! One more thing: Make the “Consumerist” logo in the top corner bigger! I just want to get to the main page, and it’s frustratingly tiny!

    (Poll, please…?)

  104. SexCpotatoes says:

    I hate it! Hate it! Hate! Hate! Hate! Hate! Hate!

    Please go back to the consumerist design it used to was. I hate how this site is screwy and looks exactly like gizmodo (I hate their layout as well).

    The old site was a lot easier to read and use.

  105. Bah, me no likey, too much clicky too read short stories.

  106. Seacub says:

    All the Gawker sites with this format are now very hard to read. Hard to tell what’s an ad and what’s a story. Overall wonky with the small pictures and font. It makes me feel a little bit dead inside.

  107. edgesmash says:

    It’d be great if you could allow logged in users to choose the format they wanted. Because I sure don’t like this layout.