Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Pastimes : Classic SI Customization Option -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: BryanB who wrote (246)	12/20/1999 12:58:00 AM
From: Ed Forrest	Respond to of 644

BryanB Could you change the visited links from Gold to Red as in the Classic SI?.That would go a long way to giving the same visual to the new as all were used to in the Classic. Cheers Ed

To: BryanB who wrote (246)	12/20/1999 1:07:00 AM
From: Snowshoe	Respond to of 644

>>6. Font Size: Please correct me if I'm wrong (like I needed to ask you to do that <g>), but the font size in the message text is exactly the same size on the old as in the new. The font size of the navigation (i.e. previous/next/repond) is larger on the old than on the new, correct? If this is what you'd like to have changed, then we'll look into it. That doesn't "seem" like a tough request from a technical perspective - of course, the engineers usually shoot me when I say that. :) << Bryan, The font size in the message text is indeed the same size. But that's not the problem! The problem is the tiny font size in the subject list and message list, coupled with the lack of spacing between entries in the list. At an absolute minimum you really should add some space between the list entries in both the New and New Classic versions of SI! (However, I personally still prefer the old SI format for the message list, with the text excerpt in a larger font on one line and the details below it.) Increasing the size of the (previous/next/respond) navigation would also help. Since I have special needs I'll PM you with some further info. Greg

To: BryanB who wrote (246)	12/20/1999 1:09:00 AM
From: Jorj X Mckie	Respond to of 644

Bryan, In fact the font size and the font do seem to be the same as with the classic SI. However, there is a difference that irritates my eyes. It took me a couple of minutes to see what the difference might be. I just pulled up your message with the classic and the new SI interfaces side by side (same monitor). It appears that the classic SI has slightly less contrast than the new SI. So, although there is a difference, I will try to fix it on my end. 6. Font Size: Please correct me if I'm wrong (like I needed to ask you to do that <g>), but the font size in the message text is exactly the same size on the old as in the new. The font size of the navigation (i.e. previous/next/repond) is larger on the old than on the new, correct? If this is what you'd like to have changed, then we'll look into it. That doesn't "seem" like a tough request from a technical perspective - of course, the engineers usually shoot me when I say that. :)

To: BryanB who wrote (246)	12/20/1999 1:38:00 AM
From: Cheeky Kid	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 644

Bryan, All fonts are fine, except: SI: StockTalk: Welcome to SI: Classic SI Customization Option and: Previous \| Next \| Respond and View Next 10 Messages If these are enlarged it will be fine. On 21 inch monitors most people will decrease the Variable Width Font in the browser so you can fit more text on the screen. In the Old version of SI, the links above (in this post) are larger even with the browser font set to Arial 10. SEE: unicus.com This example was taken with my browser set to Arial Font at 10. I think this may be an issue with older HTML code font sizes used on the OLD SI (HTML ver 3?). We don't want all the fonts larger, just the ones I listed above in bold. If people with large monitors increase the font size to the default 12, kind of defeats the purpose of a large monitor. At the very least make this portion of a thread larger: SI: StockTalk: Welcome to SI: Classic SI Customization Option IMO PS I took you off ignore along time ago, how long are you going to continue to punish me? : (

To: BryanB who wrote (246)	12/20/1999 6:46:00 AM
From: Sawdusty	Respond to of 644

"6. Font Size: Please correct me if I'm wrong (like I needed to ask you to do that <g>), but the font size in the message text is exactly the same size on the old as in the new. The font size of the navigation (i.e. previous/next/repond) is larger on the old than on the new, correct? If this is what you'd like to have changed, then we'll look into it. That doesn't "seem" like a tough request from a technical perspective - of course, the engineers usually shoot me when I say that. :)" That's it!!!!!!! and please relocate the "Remove Subject" Thanks

To: BryanB who wrote (246)	12/20/1999 9:27:00 AM
From: peter michaelson	Respond to of 644

Bryan: I can't tell you how happy I am to hear that the BrowseMaster functionality will be instituted. Godspeed and thanks!!!! peter

To: BryanB who wrote (246)	12/20/1999 9:30:00 AM
From: out_of_the_loop	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 644

BEST BROWSEMASTER FEATUREs 1. Get ALL new messages. 2. Auto-refresh this page 3. Change the limit number of messages retrieved at one time. That is the order I view the features in terms of priority. Thanks.

To: BryanB who wrote (246)	12/20/1999 10:37:00 AM
From: IEarnedIt	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 644

Hi Bryan. Thanks for the post. I am still having the flip flop between classic and new SI when I click on my bookmarked pages and I can't figure out what is going on??? I even went into "customize" and updated changes but it's still happening. Unfortunately it's intermittent so I can't give you the key strokes so programmers can duplicate. JD

To: BryanB who wrote (246)	12/20/1999 11:48:00 AM
From: kaydee	Respond to of 644

Brayn, I appreciate your response(s). After reading them carefully, I have to ask this. Do you think you are doing us a favor by giving us 'SI classic interface button',, if yes, it is very unfortunate; That is not your fault, it all boils down to company options + ego... Please remember : Customer is always right; Consider yourself lucky, SI has an excellent customer feedback process; Thanks for allowing me to express my thoughts.. DB

To: BryanB who wrote (246)	12/20/1999 4:50:00 PM
From: Susan G	Respond to of 644

Bryan, This is soooo weird: Aside from SI being turtlelike with lots of errors today, (It's ok, I'm patient and realize the growing pains are inevitable) EVERY OTHER POST I click on switches back from the old style SI (but not completely - 1/2 and 1/2) to the new style SI. Since I love the new SI and have made no format changes, I'm wondering what's going on. System overload because of the new personalization options or some kind of bug. Thought you'd like to know. Susan

To: BryanB who wrote (246)	12/20/1999 5:55:00 PM
From: Kid Rock	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 644

repeat question: what is the underlying database for SI messages? Oracle SQL-Server Sybase Informix UDB other?? (Fox-Pro)<g>

To: BryanB who wrote (246)	12/20/1999 7:53:00 PM
From: CatLady	Respond to of 644

Bryan - Re: fonts Yes, ALL the navigation links as well as the Subjectmarks, Peoplemarks, Message lists, and Subject listings need to be bigger, or use the user's browser default font. ==== 6. Font Size: Please correct me if I'm wrong (like I needed to ask you to do that <g>), but the font size in the message text is exactly the same size on the old as in the new. The font size of the navigation (i.e. previous/next/repond) is larger on the old than on the new, correct? If this is what you'd like to have changed, then we'll look into it. That doesn't "seem" like a tough request from a technical perspective - of course, the engineers usually shoot me when I say that. :)

To: BryanB who wrote (246)	12/20/1999 8:13:00 PM
From: CatLady	Respond to of 644

"Upgrading the message database is the critical action required to enhance SI performance. We can't complete the database upgrade until we turn off the old SI. " I'm having trouble understanding this from a technical point of view. Both new and classic are running from the same database, right? But classic SI runs faster than new SI does. That says to me that there's a different bottleneck impeding the performance of new SI. So you could complete the database upgrade and the new ( and by then only ) SI servers will still have performance problems. I'm sure upgrading the database servers will be a good thing, but the explanation as posted doesn't leave me with warm fuzzies that overall SI performance will be any better.

To: BryanB who wrote (246)	12/20/1999 10:32:00 PM
From: kha vu	Respond to of 644

hi BryanB, Maybe it is ONLY today problem: It shows that I have messages BUT when I click on it, it timeouts, logs me off.

To: BryanB who wrote (246)	1/6/2000 2:38:00 PM
From: BryanB	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 644

Attention BrowseMaster Users... I mentioned in an earlier post that we are planning to implement most, if not all, of the BrowseMaster features into the new SI. See my original post here... Message 12334452 In that post I suggested that those of you who are BrowseMaster fans should give us a list of priorities and we'll put those on the top of the list. We've received a number of Public and Private responses, but what we need is a consolidated list. I will post this message on the Classic SI and BrowseMaster threads, and suggest that you all use the BrowseMaster thread to prioritize your preferences as a group. Then, please select one representative to send the list to me via PM. I know that CatLady is a BM fan, so if she's willing to volunteer, that would be great. :) Thanks, Bryan

To: BryanB who wrote (246)	1/9/2000 7:41:00 PM
From: Ron	Respond to of 644

Some nice improvements already. But it sure would be great if SI would improve the EARNINGS page. The thing is almost impossible to read. Odd.

To: BryanB who wrote (246)	2/28/2000 6:19:00 PM
From: Jeff Fox	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 644

Bryan, re: Unreadable message lists Why the zebra strips on message lists? Is there people in this world that like this look? My problem is that the alternating white and grey act as camouflage making the headers difficult to read. The old SI had message list done right. Bryan - FYI - I have now provide this input three times without any comment or acknowledgement. Jeff

To: BryanB who wrote (246)	2/29/2000 6:45:00 AM
From: Snowshoe	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 644

Bryan, I agree with those who complained about the message lists. I suggest: 1) Get rid of the zebra striping. It's inconsistent with the other lists on SI, and the diminished contrast is quite painful for those with less-than-perfect vision. 2) Use only one line for each message. Reduce the length of the text string extract, and/or truncate the person's name, and/or abbreviate the date. Eliminate the inconsistent wrapping that sometimes spreads these fields across two or three lines. 3) Increase the space between lines, and perhaps increase the font size a notch. Brian, the message list is by far my biggest complaint about the New SI. The bizarre thing is that if you're on a thread where one poster has a long name, it causes all the lines to wrap. This is why I wonder if you and your developer's are using the same monitor configuration as normal people. Are you seeing this problem? It just looks so tacky. I really hope you can do something about this.