[Bookman]

I'm posting this question in here because for the life of me I can't figure out how to start a new topic!

When the site came back up and I tried logging back in, it asked me for an email address and password, which I tried to remember but was unsuccessful. So I started a "new" account. When it asked, I suggested a username which I had to abandon the last time the forum software changed. The new site--this site--let me have that name back, which made me happy. However, now, if I try to log in with my "old" username and password--the ones I was using just last week--it logs me in as my NEW username; however, no credit for the last few years' worth of posts.

How can I keep my new username but still get credit for the posts I made under my previous username? Is there a way?

??

--Bookman (formerly iSunfish)

[cpoff]

You must use one or the other. We can't combine accounts.

-cp

[macpick]

My only comment on the news is a simple one: On the Macworld home page, I much prefer "All Stories" over "Top Stores." (I want to see everything and I like seeing the post times.) After I link to a story and then link back to the home page, I always have to select "All Stories" again. Can't the home page remember my preference?

Never mind...I just saw the box below offering to make "All Stories" the default. Sorry. I don't know why I didn't notice that before.

[Pete Wojciechowski]

New Question.

Hows come my entire name shows up, instead of my nickname, or sign in name?
I went in, and tried to change it twice, no dice.

Any suggestions?

Thanks,
Pete

(MacOutlaw)

[Dan Frakes]

Pete, it looks like you signed up with your full name as your forums username, which is what displays in the forums. What you're changing is your "real" name. Unfortunately I don't think there's a way to change your username once the account has been created. (Then again, we're just learning the new forums, as well, so perhaps there is a way I haven't found yet...)

[Sparc]

You had a wonderful site. It's still informative but I'm not being forced into viewing web pages that are a hair's breadth in width. Please, fire up your MBP in 1920 x 1200 mode and see what a complete waste of space it is. Why are you forcing people with higher resolutions to view your site as though we are using 800 x 600 displays? The fact you further split the narrow layout into three columns is somewhat of an enigma to me.
I do wish you all the very best with your new design though. Shame it pretty much excludes anyone that falls under the Accessibility category.



[Edit] Merry Christmas btw!

[Bookman]

You are getting there! Thanks for adding the posting date/time to the headlines on the homepage. Thanks, too, for the tip on making All Stories the default view.

Now, I beg you--BEG you--to make the headline column the w i d e s t column on the front page, and to make the headlines themselves BLACK text. They will gain so much emphasis with these two design changes, and really emphasize the content. That big ad on the right doesn't neet to be so big; it's animated, for pete's sake (and ditch the banner add under the nav header, I still say).

If you must keep the width of the columns as they are, play a shell game and move the story sellers from the left hand column to the right, and the big ad to the narrower column on the left.

But really--black text for the headlines. The blue text simply makes the headlines blend in to the whole site. By going all blue, you sacrifice putting your best foot forward--your terrific writers and their stories and columns--for slavish adherence to a visual style.

2¢ more --Books

[Pete Wojciechowski]

Thanks Dan,
I'll "Retry".

Pete

[dmod415]

I've been a daily visitor to the OS X and Desktop Mac Forums for several years. I've voiced my dismay with the changes that have been made about as forcefully as civility permits.

I'm clearly not the only one who values function over form. A good percentage of comments have lacked ringing endorsement of the changes. I would suggest it's time for a "reality check" independent of emotion, pro or con.

Usually in matters such as this, there is a "project team" given a certain amount of rope, overseen by (senior?) management so as to avoid disaster-level unintended consequences. Has anyone noticed that comments of any type are fewer day by day?

Before these changes, there would be perhaps nine threads with new comments (or new threads) on the OS X Forum, and about half that on the Desktop Mac Forum. Count the daily participation. You're less than half that and the trend is down.

A lot of previously familiar contribuitors are conspicuous by their absence. If SOMEONE doesn't do SOMETHING really quick your forums seem to rapidly be going the way of the dodo.

Of course, if MacWorld management has determined the forums have outlived their usefulness...

[Kyan]

I agree with dmod.

I used to check these forums every day, now it's maybe once every three days. I cannot tell from the main forum page what folders to read, as the left sidebar does not show whether there is a new post for example in Mac OS X or Portable Macs.

The wide column in the middle is just too busy for me to bother with. For example right now it lists:

Re: Keep the feedback coming 1 hour ago in Website Feedback bydmod415
Re: Standard-def sources & resolution 1 hour ago in Story Discussion byhillstones
Re: MacBook Pro Contrast: 2.2ghz vs. 2.6ghz 1 hour ago in Portable Macs byG9Core
Re: Will fixmbr break bootcamp? 2 hours ago in Mac 911 bydougoftheabaci
Re: can't send myself an email with Gmail 2 hours ago in Mac 911 bydougoftheabaci
Re: memorex travel drive usb thumbdrive wont work 2 hours ago in Mac 911 byDMurray431
Re: What Hard Drive should I get? 3 hours ago in Portable Macs byM a c B o o K
Re: Handbrake in Leopard 3 hours ago in iPod and iTunes byhappymac
Re: Firewire & sleep stopped working... anything I'm not thinking of? 5 hours ago in Mac 911 byNagromme
Ethernet Routers and Nortel VPNs 5 hours ago in Mac IT and Security byhafisher
Re: Desktop disaster due to "Quickbooks for Mac" update 5 hours ago in Mac 911 bydougoftheabaci
Loop video on iPhone? 5 hours ago in iPhone byjmdarter
Re: Possible to view a dead internet forum? (Google cached?) 5 hours ago in Mac 911 byiSeeXiMac
Re: Using Multiple Folders for iTunes 5 hours ago in iPod and iTunes bymdawson
Re: xp pro ver 2002 keeps crashing on parallels 7 hours ago in Windows On Mac byMacCheetah3
Re: Total usable RAM in 2.33Ghz MacBook Pro 15"? 7 hours ago in Mac 911 byMacCheetah3
Re: Lost Playlists in iTunes 7 hours ago in iPod and iTunes bygarnerac
URL's, metafiles, and recording streaming radio 7 hours ago in iPod and iTunes byrfrazier
Re: Force Safari to remember passwords 8 hours ago in Mac OS X bytuburan
Media browser view 9 hours ago in Story Discussion byyashrg
Re: Editing DVD Footage in Final Cut Pro (Not Copyrighted Material) 9 hours ago in Create bydougoftheabaci
Re: Cookies on Macworld.com 10 hours ago in Website Feedback byPete Wojciechowski
The Ghost of Networks Past 11 hours ago in Mac OS X byJCheyne

It is not clear what forums these posts are in without as close read. In fact, this is the first time I've bothered with taking such a close close. I want things to be clear with just a glance. Now maybe somewhere there is a customizable way to list these in order of forum rather than by most recent across all topics. But shouldn't the default be more like the old version of the boards?

I really must wonder whether someone new was brought in to design the site who had never used it before, because it seems everything good has been tossed out.

Also, what about some feedback on the feedback? I'm getting the feeling no-one is listening to us about the design, really.

Usually there is just a comment "actually, you can do that by clicking here". What I want to hear is "Yes, we realize you don't like the design

A) WE ARE GOING TO MAKE IT BETTER, SO PLEASE STICK AROUND or

B) LIFE IS UNFAIR. WE ARE NOT GOING TO DEVIATE FROM OUR VISION OF THE FORUMS.

Then I could either relax and hope for something good to happen or stop wasting my time here.

Kellie, is anyone really listening????

EDITED TO ADD: I decided I would finally sift through the customize view -> edit your view or whatever. But even when I dug down that deep, I couldn't uncheck any boxes to personalize my view. WTF? Plus, it doesn't look like that is what I want anyway. Before you could just "collapse" the categories you didn't want to read and they were easy to open when you wanted to drop in for a quick look.

This current forums makes it look like if I uncheck Mac 911 (which I couldn't do) then I'll never see it unless I dig through again an uncheck it.

My conclusion? VISTA sales are down so low, their staff have been cut back and for some inexplicable reason, MacWorld hired a few of them to redo their forums.

[Spidereye]

I couldn't agree more with Kyan! Busy, busy, busy - the web page is no fun now to go to. There are still no dates on the main page, which is cluttered with visual garbage. I rarely go past the main page now. Macworld has long been one of my "must see" pages each day; now, I am close to skipping it and using the magazine instead.

PLEASE, PLEASE, PLEASE, get an expert on clarity of web design to take a second look.

[PeterG]

I have to say that I have Macworld set as a tab because I liked to open it quickly, and read the latest news that was happening.

I admit I haven't been looking as hard because it blends into the adv'.

Nothing wrong with making money but I've stopped for the news.

Just being honest.



Peter

[MacCheetah3]

Hi
I didn't see it posted and apologize if I overlooked it but the forums are practically useless for Windows users. Macworld forums, I get it but not all of us use the Mac OS at all times to browse the Internet. I tried both Internet Explorer 7 and Safari 3.0.4 for Windows and neither has anything listed under Actions nor even a Reply button. So, the most i can do is read when using WIndows XP.

[icerabbit]

I actually have three 800x480 screens within arms length, and I don't like to have to scroll horizontally, really.

Let's stick to 800w for the people who don't have broadband, the latest gear, etc. With bigger monitors (I have been using 1600x since I can't remember when) you don't have to go full screen to read a website. A website that's going to stretch full width at 1600w and beyond isn't really going to look great. But, yes, they could probably do a hybrid design that shrinks & stretches between 770 over 1000 to 1150 or so to accommodate bigger screens.