Visitors can check out the Forum FAQ by clicking this link. You have to register before you can post: click the REGISTER link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. View our Forum Privacy Policy.
Want to receive the latest contracting news and advice straight to your inbox? Sign up to the ContractorUK newsletter here. Every sign up will also be entered into a draw to WIN £100 Amazon vouchers!
You are not logged in or you do not have permission to access this page. This could be due to one of several reasons:
You are not logged in. If you are already registered, fill in the form below to log in, or follow the "Sign Up" link to register a new account.
You may not have sufficient privileges to access this page. Are you trying to edit someone else's post, access administrative features or some other privileged system?
If you are trying to post, the administrator may have disabled your account, or it may be awaiting activation.
BBC is dumbed down "flabby Liberalism". Meh.
Torygraph is now ruined.
DailyFail is...
Guardian is mostly about how great immigration is and how Climate Change is everything. Double meh.
Based on that, I don't look at any "newspapers" in the UK.
BBC is dumbed down "flabby Liberalism". Meh.
Torygraph is now ruined.
DailyFail is...
Guardian is mostly about how great immigration is and how Climate Change is everything. Double meh.
Based on that, I don't look at any "newspapers" in the UK.
For a long time now the comments in The Telegraph were better than the articles. Now it appears that all comments have been removed. What with that and the new format I'll avoid for now.
I use Breitbart and The Guardian for news these days. I've boycotted the BBC in its entirety.
I don't agree with The Guardian's politics but some of their in-depth articles are good and they generally allow comments.
Absolutely agree, but bizarrely some UI "experts" (such as the one you posted a link to the other week) insist that fixed page lengths are the Devil's work, and infinite scroll is far better.
That wasn't what Troy Hunt was saying in It’s 2016 already, how are websites still screwing up these user experiences?! though. He was objecting to the practice sites have of deliberately splitting articles across multiple pages when they would easily fit on one page. Slate is a bugger for this, as is Harper's - that's why, if I post something from such sources, I always try to find the way to bypass it, such as ?single=1 in https://harpers.org/archive/1956/03/subways-are-for-sleeping/?single=1 and .single before .html in http://www.slate.com/articles/technology/bitwise/2014/07/roko_s_basilisk_the_most_terrifying_thought_experi ment_of_all_time.single.html.
The only reason they do this is to increase ad impressions. It's annoying, particularly with a short piece where the second page contains only a two-sentence paragraph
Infinite scroll is the worst UI "innovation" since that sodding paperclip
Absolutely agree, but bizarrely some UI "experts" (such as the one you posted a link to the other week) insist that fixed page lengths are the Devil's work, and infinite scroll is far better.
I suppose a scrolling window wouldn't be quite so bad, provided the browser was careful not to misposition during a transition and lose one's place.
Another annoying "innovation" is news pages that feature relative dates ages in the past, such as "two months, three weeks, and two hours ago". Obviously some pipsqeak developer thought it was frightfully clever displaying dates in that form. But most people would probably far prefer a simple date. (I don't have such a problem with relative times on genuinely recent articles, such as "3 hours ago".)
The New DT looks like the Independent. Hope the style does not signify political bent. Still, as long as Matt is there.
Worst for endless scrolling is the Metro. You scroll endlessly, click on a link and go back and you are up the top again! I just paste links into a new tab now, much simpler.
Leave a comment: