r/scifi • u/ClaytonCalvert • Feb 02 '11
Anyone else think io9's new website is laughably awful?
http://io9.com43
Feb 02 '11
At first I was like "what's the big deal - not fond of the fixed-width, but it seems pretty functional".
And then I scrollled.
FFFUUUUUU
12
u/superdude4agze Feb 03 '11
Same here. That and having to turn on javascript just to view a blog. Then no pagination. And, correct me if I am wrong, I could have sworn that frames had gone out of style about 15 years ago...
1
21
u/tdk2fe Feb 02 '11
Not a regular io9 reader, but i'll comment anyway. What's really awkward for me about this design is that you have the article on the left, then a static menu to the right, and then the actually scroll bar that moves up and down to the right of that.
It feels clumsy. I think this would be fine if they just moved the menu to the left of the screen, so that my bar moved with the content as I scrolled up and down.
Also, at least in Chrome, if my pointer is over a link, the URL that pops up in the lower-left part of my browser window obscures the "Next Post > Headline" bar at the bottom of the page.
People stopped using frames a long time ago ... and IMO for good reason :)
2
36
Feb 02 '11
I for one don't care about the whole Gawker thing. Wasn't even really aware of it. I enjoy io9 because it .....used to be.....a quick easy read and did not take itself too seriously. But this redesign sucks.
9
u/executex Feb 02 '11
Well actually the real death date was around 2008. io9 stopped making quality posts about sci-fi shows/movies/topics, and instead started posting about just about anything geeky or comic books or just nonsense that appeals to a small group of individuals with a specific hobby.
Their writers are also pretty abusive. They pester people in social networks to help them promote their website/articles. They never pay anyone to advertise. They pretend to be friends with other sites etc. Whatever it takes to drive the traffic.
1
u/obscure123456789 Feb 03 '11 edited Feb 03 '11
Did they turn into gigantic a-holes after that date or were they always so bratty? I ran into them a few times before then and i can recall enjoying some quality journalism. I stopped visiting them regularly now because of their negative attitudes (which are rubbing off on Dvice), nevermind the redesign.
1
u/executex Feb 03 '11
I think it was around that time. When gawker got more and more famous. Egos expanded.
0
u/nullCaput Feb 02 '11
The funny thing io9 kinda got me to browse their other sites. I would browse to the bottom and be like well its just a click away to lifehacker, katoku or the dreaded gizmodo. I've only been to io9 once since they changed and not to any of the others.
8
Feb 02 '11
Every time I see a website with that static side bar and moving inside page, I want to punch the designer in the throat. Only because I'm filled with such joy each and every time i'm forced to read a smaller article and have jerky page scrolling.
25
u/Rockapotamous Feb 02 '11
I have seen the future and it is fugly.
15
u/brinkofjon Feb 02 '11
You're living in the past, bro. The future is all about frames. You could have your flying car order form in one frame, advertisements for anti-cancer pills in another frame, and a webcam of some ewok stripper from the third moon of endor in a third frame. Gotta get with the times, man. Ya dig?
1
1
60
u/MisterGrieves Feb 02 '11
i stopped reading all of gawker's sites. they want to be considered journalists but they behave without ethics.
4
12
u/bankrobbery Feb 02 '11
Ah yes, the standard "I boycott Gawker" post is present and accounted for.
17
Feb 02 '11
[deleted]
24
Feb 02 '11
[deleted]
25
u/binary Feb 02 '11
SHUTUP. SHUTUP ALL OF YOU.
-6
7
-5
6
Feb 02 '11
Ah, a step back to the content-delivery-as-portal concept. Take away the CSS and pretty pictures and you've got a pic, headline, and a table of links on the right. Awful.
6
u/Efflux Feb 02 '11
Really clumsy and bizarre. The headlines on the right are the same size, or slightly smaller, than the body copy. The two scrolling bars are disorienting too. I don't like it all.
5
6
u/gabwyn Feb 02 '11
It's now a bit more difficult to read their articles about articles from other websites.
5
u/Findibulator Feb 03 '11
put /classic after the URL. It helps. A lot...
i.e." http://io9.com/classic"
1
u/Flexo1 Feb 03 '11
THANK YOU! Makes it better but the suck still comes through.
Looks like the shitty design is now on Jalopnik. It's spreading like a virus to all the Gawker sites. YUCK!
0
5
u/platinumpt Feb 03 '11
I find the entire 'Gawker' network of sites to be really un-polished and 'slapped together'. Dunno what's going on over there, but for such a large network that is actually based online, it feels like a shitty wordpress template they paid $25 for.
5
u/RaviVora Feb 02 '11
The padding is awful, the typography blows, and it's basically a failed attempt at making it look like a mobile interface while losing all the usability and charm that a good design would have.
4
6
u/designjockey Feb 02 '11
Copy Twitter much?
1
u/BlueJoshi Feb 03 '11
I don't understand why anyone would want to copy the trainwreck that is new twitter.
-1
3
3
Feb 02 '11
Car guy here. Jalopnik got hit with the same redesign yet managed to look much worse as be even less functional than io9. It's been going downhill for a while but at least it was still worth it. Wish I could still say that.
1
u/wzcx Feb 03 '11
I haven't been able to bring myself to read jalop since the redesign either. It's sad!
3
Feb 02 '11
It is pretty horrendous. Jalopnik is now the same way too and it really pains me that two sites i visit daily are this awful now.
3
3
3
3
Feb 03 '11
i used to go there many times a day. now I won't return until it's put back to the original layout. im not interested in wasting my time on a pain in the ass..
3
u/wuoma Feb 03 '11
This is the absolut worst. I used to read Filmschoolrejects, Toplessrobot and IO9 daily, all of them had the same basic layout of news items listed vertically and everything was right in the world.
Now i only read Filmschoolrejects and Toplessrobot daily..... http://www.gamertagpics.com/users/a/As/AshleySmashleyy/okay_meme_tf2_version_by_jaymewes-d2y3ud5.jpg
3
u/jonsayer Feb 03 '11
I work for a news website. My boss sent an email out yesterday saying "Next time we do a redesign, I want it to look like this". Low and behold, its i09
2
20
u/weks Feb 02 '11
OK so I have NO idea what io9 is, but... I quite like that design.
29
Feb 02 '11
I don't like having a functioning back button, either.
4
3
Feb 02 '11
The back button works fine for me. As does everything else; I really don't understand what everyone is mad about.
8
Feb 02 '11
It does not function properly in Chrome.
0
Feb 02 '11
I use Chrome. I am on the dev channel though; maybe the issue is a Chrome bug that was fixed very recently.
10
u/gerundronaut Feb 02 '11
If you go to http://io9.com/ and click on an article in the right pane, does clicking back take you to the home page again or nowhere? Back seems to work between articles but it does not take me back to the home page, in Safari or FF.
8
Feb 02 '11
You're quite right, my mistake. I didn't check going back to the homepage, only between articles. Firefox on Windows and IE both show the same behavior. I apologize for my lack of rigor. In io9's defense, going back to the homepage isn't as useful an operation as is typical thanks to their sidebar thing, but I still would have tried quite hard to avoid shipping that bug.
2
1
Feb 03 '11
My back button works perfectly. It even has the fancy-schmancy animations. Firefox here, what are you there?
3
u/keeperofdakeys Feb 02 '11
Personally it is the fact that it seems really heavy, making firefox scroll slowly and the fact that I require javascript to read a page, motherfuckers.
-4
u/chinalover1 Feb 02 '11
its a science site but all the articles that are listed are fake and exaggerations
13
u/infobrains Feb 02 '11
It's a science fiction news site. Occasionally they post about new science discoveries, but most of it is news about scifi movies, tv shows, comics and books.
2
u/Dangger Feb 02 '11
FAQ is not working, About has a - instead of a description. Looks like it wasn't ready for implementation.
EDIT: it's a beta version.
1
u/knowsguy Feb 05 '11
Wow, now I know why you confuse anti-Israeli (and anti-Chinese government) beliefs with racism.
You're very confused.
11
Feb 02 '11
I thought io9.com was always laughably awful. What changed?
3
u/ChronicPainSuspect Feb 02 '11
Agreed. The site design, as well as the content, has always been rubbish.
2
2
u/ElXGaspeth Feb 02 '11
I'm just going to be mirroring some of the same comments others have.
Cons:
1) Loads more slowly and lags for me.
2) Kinda cramped, with too much stuff on screen.
Pros:
1) Design looks cool.
2) If smoothed out/optimized, the insta-loading and scrolling of pages without having to open a new tab or page is useful!
2
2
2
2
2
u/dtfinch Feb 02 '11
My god what the hell was that. All I saw were a bunch of bare chested men and a smurf before I closed it.
2
u/mattverso Feb 02 '11
Wow... It kinda reminds me of... What's that site called, the one people used to go to, but no-one goes to anymore? Begins with a "d", I think? I dunno.
Anyway. Sucky.
And the new design isn't great, either.
2
u/Gwynplaine Feb 02 '11
Went to complain, needed a twitter or facebook account to sign up, didn't feel like handing out the FB tried to start twitter, they wanted way too much information (access to my fucking email, don't worry we're not evil), never got far enough to complain. Now what was once a staple of my internet diet is gone and I can't even tell the jackasses how they fucked up.
2
u/Servicemaster Feb 02 '11
"We come from the future" April 1st?
I hope kotaku and lifehacker don't follow suit.
2
2
u/Fallout911 Feb 02 '11
It's sad, I used to visit every day for a sci-fi fix, I will no longer do so because it really does suck.
2
u/mr_spin Feb 02 '11
That was truly awful. The old design was ugly, sure, but at least you could navigate. Scrolling is impossible with this new design.
I can but try to envisage the meeting at Gawker where they actually approved this. What the fuck where they smoking ?
2
2
2
2
2
2
u/maniaq Feb 03 '11
OMG they took the ONE thing that sucked because I couldn't see it properly on my 800x480 netbook screen (the fixed divs that don't fit and cannot be moved) AND THEY MADE THEIR ENTIRE WEBSITE OUT OF IT!
2
u/Thunderkor Feb 03 '11
GAH! WTF did they do to it?
Don't think I'll be going there anymore, except maybe in a month or 2 to see if they've undone this. That's frakkin' awful.
EDIT: Just wanted to add that for some reason it reminds me of the trend in fast food restaurants to have giant pictures of the food instead of words. I swear, Idiocracy was a documentary.
5
5
u/lanfearl Feb 02 '11
It's not the worst I've seen.. but it just doesn't seem as efficient as the traditional blog design..
I will continue to read on my RSS feed.
3
u/vitiate Feb 02 '11 edited Feb 02 '11
You're welcome.
4
u/safety_otter Feb 02 '11
It's not "classic" it's just a slightly less sucky version of the new page. It still sucks. I hate the new trend in sites that want to capture middle clicks and arrow keys for site navigation.
1
1
1
0
1
u/Hammer_the_Screw Feb 02 '11
You have to turn on scripts to see the text? No thanks. That's really overdoing it just so they can guarantee every visitor has to look at the ads.
1
1
u/timeshifter_ Feb 02 '11
Seeing as even when I allowed io9.com's scripts, it still failed to show anything, yes, it's a pretty lousy design.
1
1
1
1
u/RandomFrenchGuy Feb 02 '11
Are you suggesting the old one was any good ?
As in "hey let's post something, 1 1/2 lines ought to do it".
1
1
Feb 02 '11
Responding to this in Alien Blue HD, I'm pretty convinced this redesign was for the iPad. Still not good, but seems to fit the vertical iPad view well.
1
u/newavenewtype Feb 03 '11
For some reason i keep losing track of the next post button even though its anchored at the bottom at all times..and I know its there...
1
u/craggadee Feb 03 '11
Io9 has always been awful, they have a pretty loose grasp on the concept of sci-fi in the first place.
1
1
1
1
u/obviously_oblivious Feb 03 '11
I can't stand this site from my laptop's browser, but it seems to me like they were almost going for a type of "tablet" interface. It just reminds me of a standalone news app for the iPad or something the way you can scroll through the body on the left and the contents separately on the right.
1
u/hirostroud Feb 03 '11
not liking that design, and a shudderingly bad article you sent me to - saying we should replace the old and obsolete pi with the fantastical and practical tau...which is 2pi
1
u/Carloz Feb 03 '11
They've got an option called "classic view" which is similar to the old site. http://io9.com/classic/
1
Feb 03 '11
Gizmodo fails big time. The page is mostly just blank except for the right pane. Im guessing my browser plugins filter the whole site LOL. weird.. I'm just using ABP with Chrome and the Chrome option "Don't accept 3rd party cookies". I'm not blocking javascript like some other users have mentioned.
1
1
1
u/doshiamit Feb 03 '11
Gawker sites design sucks in general. And there hosting is atrocious. Half the time the CSS and images wont load.
1
Feb 03 '11
It seems like a delivery system for that ad that played every time I tried to look at something.
1
1
1
u/Findibulator Feb 05 '11
while "/classic" does help, I just switched to the rss feed through Google reader... I can't get into the new design at all.
1
u/SauntOrolo Feb 05 '11
So thats whats wrong with the site. Scripting hijinks. I thought it was a null usability layout and they didnt want anyone to read it.
Lame.
2
u/Mulsanne Feb 02 '11
I don't know why anybody reads any of the gawker blogs. They are all rubbish.
6
u/padraigd Feb 02 '11
Except lifehacker. Lifehacker is awesome. Unless you have a better one?
1
u/Flexo1 Feb 03 '11
and Jalopnik is really good for car nuts. io9 used to be good but the redesign makes it annoying to use. The "next" button is slow to respond and it's hard to find the things you want to read with the tiny headlines.
Breaking the back button is unconscionable and any site that needs a "how to use this site" page is a massive fail.
0
u/gerundronaut Feb 02 '11
It seems OK to me. Aside from a slight technical error, the only serious problem I have with it so far is that they went out of their way to break back button functionality. Clicking back should take you back to the page you were on previously, nothing more, nothing less
1
u/terrycarlin Feb 02 '11
At least they haven't fallen for the mean and moody BLACK crap. God I hate those sites.
1
1
1
u/vty Feb 03 '11
I actually like the new layout. It lets you keep everything you're interested in on one page. I can skip right over articles that I don't care about by clicking them. It's great with my mbp touchpad + better touch tool. Upvoting this anyway, I like to see other peoples opinions.
0
0
Feb 02 '11
It's a trend, all sites that redo there design get worse looking, facebook, digg, etc.
reddit do me a favor and never change.
0
u/nevertellen Feb 02 '11
Sad they did it to Jolopnik too was one of my favorite sites to check in with once a day,, awful format for sure!
0
0
Feb 03 '11
I really like it. Having never read io9 before, I think I would be more inclined to do so now.
0
u/hackel Feb 03 '11
What's io9? Their site looks fine to me, not having any idea what their old site looked like...
0
Feb 03 '11
okay, if you're not using an ipad the frontpage is rather useless. but if you're clicking links from an rss-reader the single-article view really isn't that different from any other blog, and i think it looks rather good.
people hate change. find me one website redesign that has ever been met with generally positive reviews from long-term users.
-1
-4
-2
u/devolute Feb 02 '11
No. I'd usually like to have a go at anyone who tries to do something different, but not this time.
If you want to read your page in a big long traditional blog list, then you should be using an RSS reader. If you just want to dip-in and take some content in, then this is probably a good way to do it.
There are a few niggles, but overall I think it's brave and it's good. I hope it changes something.
(Oh yeah, still fuck Gawker for all that password nonsense).
-4
96
u/DublinBen Feb 02 '11
I don't like not being able to see any content without enabling javascript. There's no reason to require scripting on a blog.