VOGONS

Common searches


Welcome to the updated VOGONS

Topic actions

Reply 300 of 668, by imi

User metadata
Rank Oldbie
Rank
Oldbie
Dominus wrote on 2020-01-03, 14:51:
1. I am using a high DPi screen to browse Vogons on my desktop 2. I am coming here with my smartphone that has a retina display […]
Show full quote

1. I am using a high DPi screen to browse Vogons on my desktop
2. I am coming here with my smartphone that has a retina display (but, yes, I'm not a teenager)
3. I think people still miss what VOGONS stand for: Very Old Games On New Systems. NEW SYSTEMS. The retro PC people came later and sometimes seem to think that they own the forum.
4. Try the oldskool theme, it's very similar to the old theme.

the vast majority of new systems do not have high DPI screens apart from phones (and I think most of the topics on here don't refer to playing on phones :p)
and in the current PC market landscape this wont change for the next several years either.

people are still mostly buying full HD monitors, even 1440p is already more than the norm (and mostly present on larger monitors anyways) and anything higher is niche still.

I am happy if the site works for you on a high DPI screen, but that is simply not what most people have.

Reply 301 of 668, by Dominus

User metadata
Rank DOSBox Moderator
Rank
DOSBox Moderator

Well, "vast majority" still leaves a minority and that is > nobody. As well as "most topics not refering to playing on phones" still leaves some, but the point was that this is NOT a retro PC and DOSBox forum, it is much more than that.

Windows 3.1x guide for DOSBox
60 seconds guide to DOSBox

Reply 302 of 668, by imi

User metadata
Rank Oldbie
Rank
Oldbie

I really don't get what you're trying to say, sorry.

using pixel accurate fonts does not make the site suddenly not usable on higher DPI monitors... so I really don't see how optimizing for those is an advantage, it is a major disadvantage for the majority of users though that have to make do with blurry fonts, and yeah I know most people are sensitized to that look nowadays unfortunately anyways since most websites only optimize for phones anymore, but I am always happy if there are exceptions, vogons isn't one of those anymore :c

Reply 303 of 668, by cde

User metadata
Rank Member
Rank
Member
keenmaster486 wrote on 2020-01-03, 06:42:

At least on Linux, web browsers don’t respect the system font antialiasing settings, in my experience.

In Debian 10, this is what I do to get back a familiar experience of pixel-aligned fonts in all applications, including browsers:

- add FREETYPE_PROPERTIES=truetype:interpreter-version=35 to /etc/environment
- remove this symlink: /etc/fonts/conf.d/10-hinting-slight.conf
- create a symlink in /etc/fonts/conf.d/ pointing to /usr/share/fontconfig/conf.avail/10-hinting-full.conf
- adjust the antialising settings of your WM. For xfce4, it's Settings->Appearance->Fonts->Hinting = Full

With all of the above, you will get non-blurry fonts.

Reply 304 of 668, by konc

User metadata
Rank Oldbie
Rank
Oldbie

The only way to come up with realistic numbers is to have a long-lasting poll, something like
-I use theme 1 and I'm happy
-I use theme 2 and I'm happy
-I tweaked a theme and I'm happy
-I tweaked a theme (size/spacing) and I'm still not happy
-I tweaked a theme (size/spacing) and I'm still not happy, but mobile experience compensates

Not that it matters, it's clear that the team wants the forum like this and it's not realistic to expect from anyone to repeat all this hard work, especially since it's ok for them.
This would help though to answer if people complaining are a minority of naggers, or the team defends bad choices. Again, nothing more to be expected out of this poll except concrete numbers. Because although I understand perfectly well why some cannot stand the new look (I kid you not, the 1st time I visited the new forum I honestly thought this was some joke like the web 2.0 photo made for fun in the old thread), I suspect actual numbers from all active users will be a lot different.

Reply 305 of 668, by Dominus

User metadata
Rank DOSBox Moderator
Rank
DOSBox Moderator
konc wrote on 2020-01-03, 15:59:
The only way to come up with realistic numbers is to have a long-lasting poll, something like -I use theme 1 and I'm happy -I us […]
Show full quote

The only way to come up with realistic numbers is to have a long-lasting poll, something like
-I use theme 1 and I'm happy
-I use theme 2 and I'm happy
-I tweaked a theme and I'm happy
-I tweaked a theme (size/spacing) and I'm still not happy
-I tweaked a theme (size/spacing) and I'm still not happy, but mobile experience compensates

Not that it matters, it's clear that the team wants the forum like this and it's not realistic to expect from anyone to repeat all this hard work, especially since it's ok for them.
This would help though to answer if people complaining are a minority of naggers, or the team defends bad choices. Again, nothing more to be expected out of this poll except concrete numbers. Because although I understand perfectly well why some cannot stand the new look (I kid you not, the 1st time I visited the new forum I honestly thought this was some joke like the web 2.0 photo made for fun in the old thread), I suspect actual numbers from all active users will be a lot different.

yes, you are right, such a poll would be good in a while, once the knee jerk reaction to something new and different has been done

Windows 3.1x guide for DOSBox
60 seconds guide to DOSBox

Reply 306 of 668, by konc

User metadata
Rank Oldbie
Rank
Oldbie
Dominus wrote on 2020-01-03, 16:04:

yes, you are right, such a poll would be good in a while, once the knee jerk reaction to something new and different has been done

Thank you for carefully reading my post and really understanding what I meant, it was a dangerous one. And you're also right about the timing

Reply 307 of 668, by Dominus

User metadata
Rank DOSBox Moderator
Rank
DOSBox Moderator

And I think the numbers would matter, btw.
I'm pretty sure that Qbix and Snover do not hope to make the majority's experience hell 😀

(some more poll questions or clarifications would need to be whether one is generally happy but there are some issues, I think)

Windows 3.1x guide for DOSBox
60 seconds guide to DOSBox

Reply 308 of 668, by gdjacobs

User metadata
Rank l33t++
Rank
l33t++
Dominus wrote on 2020-01-03, 16:20:

And I think the numbers would matter, btw.
I'm pretty sure that Qbix and Snover do not hope to make the majority's experience hell 😀

(some more poll questions or clarifications would need to be whether one is generally happy but there are some issues, I think)

Speak for yourself! Every time Muz shows up asking his weird questions, I wonder if Vogons might be some secret CIA or Facebook experiment and we're just rats in a cage. Then I put my tin hat on and the mind control beam stops working.

All hail the Great Capacitor Brand Finder

Reply 311 of 668, by VileR

User metadata
Rank Oldbie
Rank
Oldbie

A bit late to the party... gotta give a thumbs up for the new/added functionality. 😀 It would've been nicer if more of the old functionality could've stayed - e.g. next/previous page buttons, more pagination links in the forum view, more text next to icons, and (most especially!) the ability to edit & preview a message on the same page.
OTOH, I know how much compromising this sort of thing entails; having done this kind of work in the past I know exactly what Snover is talking about.

As for the design/color scheme, no huge complaints there. I've always preferred light-on-dark themes to the reverse, and when I minimize the font size + line spacing from the control panel, the screen economy is just fine.

If I could put my finger on a couple of things that could be improved, they'd be:

  • Contrast: Most of the text is very brightly white; too much contrast can be just as bad as too little, and in this case it could be toned down a bit. Links and buttons can be white, but I'd make the normal text slightly darker, more in the direction of the light purple border or so.
     
  • Font: No problem with the typeface itself, and the anti-aliasing is fine too. I think it's the hinting that isn't very good, so on low-DPI screens the text doesn't look very sharp. At least this seems to be the case in Windows, which prioritizes sharpness for small font sizes... as long as the hinting is appropriate.

Both of these things I could 'fix' on my end using custom stylesheets, so no biggie, but they'd probably improve the experience.

web  /   blog   /   tube

Reply 313 of 668, by schmatzler

User metadata
Rank Member
Rank
Member
James-F wrote on 2020-01-03, 13:47:

Nobody is using high DPI screens to browse Vogons... this is a retro PC and DosBOX forum... no teenager comes here with their smartphone and retina displays.

Uhm...I rarely access this website with my retro PC's. Because they are slow and it doesn't make sense to browse the web with them for longer periods of time.
Choppy scrolling gives me a headache.

Also, 4K screens are becoming pretty much the norm now and current smartphones are high DPI by design, even the cheapest ones.
This site is very well optimized for them.

I am also a webdesigner and while I don't think the font used here is the prettiest one on the market (that would be Uni Neue for me), it's doing its job.
Maybe we should switch over to Comic Sans MS for a week and see how long people can stand it. 😜

I understand that the font doesn't work for you because of personal reasons, but maybe you can just zoom in? That makes it much more readable.

Reply 314 of 668, by xjas

User metadata
Rank l33t
Rank
l33t

@imi, James-F, etc.:

For the most part, I'm not using high-DPI screens to browse Vogons either. The main displays I use this forum on consist of: a 2013 Macbook's 1280x800 screen, a 2011-ish Ideapad's 1600x900 screen, a 1280x1024 Dell monitor from 2008, and a 21" Samsung PVA 1600x1200 monitor on my KVM. So, from my low-ish DPI perspective, the new site looks and works fucking fine.

The font sizes are comfortable and the "information density" is more than good enough. And yes, I'm talking about the desktop site here (although the mobile one is perfectly good to me too.) I have excellent eyesight and I sit a reasonable distance from my monitor instead of having my face smooshed right up against it, so whatever.

Here's an idea: you can hit control-minus (or command-minus) on like every browser ever to zoom out one notch instead of endlessly moaning about it. Problem solved. Incidentally, the new forum scales with browser zoom far better than the old one ever did.

If you don't like the colors, there's an oldschool theme, like, right there, that approximates the old board pretty well. You could just ... use that? I mean, it's there! Or is that just too easy of a solution?

Honestly, I can't understand how some of you function in daily life if you get this upset by background colors or font kerning or text anti-aliasing. Is everything else in your life so perfect that that's all you have left to complain about?

twitch.tv/oldskooljay - playing the obscure, forgotten & weird - most Tuesdays & Thursdays @ 6 PM PDT. Bonus streams elsewhen!

Reply 315 of 668, by Shagittarius

User metadata
Rank Oldbie
Rank
Oldbie

Its good for people to complain, they have every right. I can't stand the people who disagree who tell them to shut up or try and shut them up, that's not how a civilized society works.

Reply 316 of 668, by xjas

User metadata
Rank l33t
Rank
l33t

I'm not telling anyone to shut up, but ignoring blatantly obvious solutions to their problems (the oldschool theme, browser zoom, etc.) so they can just keep moaning isn't helpful to anyone. Snover has gone out of his way to fix every single actual bug, useability issue (flicker caused by the dithering, the animated jump scrolling, etc.), and honor some really excellent feature requests ("Active Topics") that have been posted here & in the other thread, but they're getting lost in the noise from the crowd who were primed & ready to complain no matter what.

From my perspective, this new forum is a huge improvement in nearly every way over the old one, so I really want to emphasize the opinions of the people claiming it's "unusable", etc. are not universal. Can you imagine what the tone of this thread would be like if we'd switched from this forum back to the old one?

It's not "good" for people to complain if it's way over the top about something trivial or minute like a forum redesign, and the complainer has no intention of accepting a solution. Seriously, re-direct that irateness towards something that matters. Otherwise at some point the onus goes on YOU to bend slightly or adapt rather than standing your ground with fire and brimstone, especially if it's over something as trivial as a FONT. Don't like it? I'm sure someone here could whip you up a 15-line browser CSS extension that would change it, you just need to ask.

twitch.tv/oldskooljay - playing the obscure, forgotten & weird - most Tuesdays & Thursdays @ 6 PM PDT. Bonus streams elsewhen!

Reply 317 of 668, by imi

User metadata
Rank Oldbie
Rank
Oldbie

well, I don't know about you, but I can't read this without getting sore eyes after a few seconds, zooming in or out doesn't change that as the problem is the total inconsistency of the font, different line-widths and odd curves that makes it hard to read... of course, if I would turn on smoothed fonts (I will not do that as it would completely ruin any chance of getting crisp fonts elsewhere) and make it even larger it would look fine and be easy enough to read, but that goes completely counter to the information density that is already worse as things stand with the current design even with the custom font off and would make it equally unenjoyable to use.

vogons.png
Filename
vogons.png
File size
15.01 KiB
Views
199 views
File license
CC-BY-4.0

compare that to how easy to read and how crisp the default font is

vogons2.png
Filename
vogons2.png
File size
13.62 KiB
Views
197 views
File license
CC-BY-4.0

Reply 318 of 668, by xjas

User metadata
Rank l33t
Rank
l33t

^^ what the crap? That's not even slightly what it looks like for me. Here's what I see (at -2 zoom level, which is how I've been using it on my 1280x800 MBP):

Screen Shot 2020-01-03 at 5.07.36 pm.png
Filename
Screen Shot 2020-01-03 at 5.07.36 pm.png
File size
73.85 KiB
Views
194 views
File license
CC-BY-4.0

Granted, this is on OS/X, but on my Linux & Windows PCs it looks similar. Why are you so against having anti-aliasing on?

Incidentally, ALL the UI elements look pretty good on my setup when zoomed out:

Screen Shot 2020-01-03 at 5.12.43 pm.png
Filename
Screen Shot 2020-01-03 at 5.12.43 pm.png
File size
81.61 KiB
Views
194 views
File license
CC-BY-4.0

Again, my Windows & Linux experiences are similar (I use a mix of Firefox, Vivaldi, and Opera for browsing but can't speak for anything else.) What you're having strikes me as a specific problem with your setup rather than a universal issue on "low-DPI screens."

twitch.tv/oldskooljay - playing the obscure, forgotten & weird - most Tuesdays & Thursdays @ 6 PM PDT. Bonus streams elsewhen!

Reply 319 of 668, by dionb

User metadata
Rank l33t
Rank
l33t
Snover wrote on 2020-01-02, 06:18:
dionb wrote on 2019-12-31, 15:15:

The problem seems to be that the line spacing option affects lines within a text block, but not between them, which is where the problem is.

This was an oversight and should be fixed now. Please let me know how it is.

Afraid no different. Here's two screenshots, there's absolutely no difference in empty space between normal vs small line spacing, so much that even on my 1440p screen the index takes up over two full screens (where it previously comfortably fit on one):

Vogons_line_spacing.png
Filename
Vogons_line_spacing.png
File size
46.5 KiB
Views
190 views
File license
Fair use/fair dealing exception

This was on Firefox 71.0, but it looks identical on Chrome 79.0.3945.88.

Last edited by dionb on 2020-01-04, 00:02. Edited 3 times in total.