narrower

having columns on BOTH sides drastically reduces readability of your site, it leaves a narrow column for main text. Horrible!

I honestly liked the wider page, but the narrow one isn't exactly killing me.

Village Idiot,

I'm sorry, but it's kind of required for ad space.

I kind of like the wider page too. How does that work columns on both sides though?

Scrolling is ok for short posts, but when you start whipping out those pedantic 2,000 word essays like Goldstein, im just going to have to start taking my business to other more pithy bloggers like Atrios.

Wider. Definitely wider. Especially useful for the eighty-gajillion widescreen laptops out now...they tend to not have much vertical real estate, and narrower designs create these ridiculously long pages.

Since it's virtually impossible to buy a 4:3 laptop anymore...it's something to think about.

Looks good to me. I think it's pretty readable overall. It's over twice as wide as your average newspaper column, and we read those everyday.

I mean, we used to...

okay... so far "narrow" is the minoirty position.

The sidebar columns will just expand out to the sides for wide resolutions, maximizing main text area.

It looks like this layout is optimized for 800x600... maybe do a layout where the center column is fluid and expands to fit the space available and the side columns are static widths... but be sure to increase the padding on the left and right of the center column so that the text doesn't crowd the sidebars.

Another personal preference... I like links to change to dark background & light text on hover instead of underline.

Thanks for listening to everyone - I know what a bitch it is to get everything working on all browser/display combinations.

Wider.

I'm just fine with the way it is today, but I'll live with whatever you do with it.

is there a website you can name with an example of that way of hover style?

I checked yours, it doesn't seem to be what you're describing.

Why not please everyone with a stylesheet switcher? Your developer probably knows how to do this.....

I think it looks swell. Thicker is always better though.

Harder, Harder

uh, ... i mean narrow

What difference does it make? My right arm is permanently asleep anyway, at this point.

From the scrolling, wise guys.

There is one thing. Can you make it so it takes you back to the same spot in comments after you post? See Scribal Terror.

There is something a little strange about the post author's name appearing twice, both in the title and at the bottom.

Ace, Check out Munuviana

Could you start posting in English and French for your readers in Quebec?

Shouldn't the article pages be three-columnized too?

For this site the code would be:

A:hover {
text-decoration: none;
background:#990000;
color: #FFFFFF;
}

One last suggestion...

To make it visually easy to find previous days' posts, you could do the same thing - make the background for the date dark and reverse the text out, plus that will add a splash of color to the site.

You should be able to allow users to set the style sheet they want to see...let some people choose the narrow if they have small screens or wide for those of us w/ wider monitors...

Check out your Contact Info

Wider. Maybe not the whole screen, but... just seems like a lot of wasted space on the sides. Too much going on in the middle.

I asked my designer to maybe try the expanding thing but set a limit of about 600px width for the main text area, so it would blow up and open but not too much. I'm not sure if she can do that.

the narrow thing blows

btw, fuck the ADD asshole that couldn't read across a line. that is the stupidest fucking comment ever. EVER. probably some narrow pricked scumbag.

yeah, i went there

Am I the only one who doesn't max out his browsing window size? A whole monitor's rather tough to scan across at a glance, line-by-line.

Wider isn't hard to do - just pin the columns to the sides of the page rather than setting a fixed width. That's how I do it, anyway.

Setting a maximum width, though... that'd require a bit of javascript.

I think you should just get rid of all the stupid ads. If you need money that badly why not try to come up with some other way of coming up with cash?

Maybe try selling some T-shirts?

Works for me like this, but I'm sure I'll still be back no matter how you do it Because I just can't quit you, Ace.

Wider, it would be much easier to read if I didn't have 1.5 to 2 inches of blank white on each side. Shoot I only have about 5 inches of text in the center that is almost as much blank space as text! Expand that, you of all people should know 5 inches isn't enough to even notice!
DKK

Five minutes til the pre-game five minutes of ads before kickoff. Why is my knee bouncing uncontrollably as I stare blankly at the screen. Come on Skins, goddammit. Teach those greeny eco-terrorist PC bastards a lesson.

Amish Predictions:

Washington over Seattle
Denver over New England
Indianapolis over Pittsburgh
Carolina over Chicago

Amish got TVs?

Seattle beats Washington 30-13
New England crushes the Broncos 24-7
Colts lose to the Steelers 21-14
Carolina barely wins in Chicago 17-16

P.S. What happened to the site? It only takes up half my screen.

no way the skins put up a hundred-nuthin yards and beat the Seahawks.

WIDER!!! My 1920X1200 rez does nothing! Nothing!!! (think McBain with his googles)

http://img125.imagevenue.com/img.php?loc=loc189&image=a3e12_spade_and_skull_Banner2_copy.jpg

Ace,

The header is kinda old, so I designed this one thinking you might not want too much. I added a cute tag line making fun of Atrios and all his open threads.

I have higher res, but I'm ok with the narrower look. ain't no thang.

I can go either way; both have been tried.

I don't think I need to say anymore.

New format looks cool and functional (esp. w/javascript off). I'm at 1280 x 800, so wider works for me.

Under "FAQS" you might want to include a "Guide to the AoS Lifestyle" which brings new visitors up to date on all the inside jokes and jargon.

Thanks for all the work, by the way.

Wider!! And maybe a little more spacing between the text and the ads on each side.

I'm not opposed to you getting more crazy blog money, but the two columns do make everything harder to read.

If pressed though, I want narrower so I can scroll away from that obnoxious Blair add as fast as possible.

Is there anything you can click to shut Tony up?

That's better. I just made myself a little AOSHQ window that cuts off the adds on both sides. Ahhhhh. No infernal flashing ads. Which aren't so bad if it's just on the one side, with a wide band of text, but which makes reading your blog literally painful in current format.

NOOOooooo the ads came back. Zombie ads.
This is awful.

The site is perfectly readable. Ace fuck these whiny pricks who are bitching its too narrow. Hell I'm reading this on an 8 year-old 15'' Trinitron monitor, set at 1024x768, and everything is fine. However, whats with the 1/2" margin on either side? If they can be slimmed down that might open up the main column a bit. Of course my computer skills equal Kerry's combat skills so...

Yep. The margins scream for a wider middle to use the page width, but it's no big deal either way.

Wider. Please, I'm beggin ya here.

Please. . . .NARROWER! NARROWER! NARROWER!

There are plenty of web sites I don't read any more because their text is wider than my screen (12.6 inches visible diagonally across).

Isn't this fun????

Ace tries to treat all readers with respect whether they're pretty or ugly. He wants to be nice and be like, "Wow, thanks for the input on design changes. But get out of my face".

Nine of diamonds,

The text would not be bigger than your screen. The code would expand the site out to accomodate your screen & resolution.

It only becomes problematic for people with very wide resolutions, where they'd wind up with a very wide text area, which some people find reduces readability, as the eye has to travel further from left to right to read a line.

Couldn't the people with teh very wide resolutions just, I don't know, resize the friggin window? Or would that be placating?

I don't know. Does that work?

If you have a fluid center column and resize your browser window, it will squeeze the center column down; the sidebars will have a fixed width; after you get the window too narrow, the horizontal scrollbar will appear so you can read the part of the page outside the browser window.

Go to Bad Example and resize the window over there to see what I mean. He also has a link in the left column to a 2 column design for 800x600 resolution.

Look at the formatting of the date line also - it's dark backgroound and light letters - makes it easier to find each day's posts.

I think there's also a little used code for maxium column width. Naturally, it doesn't work for IE!

looks great, Ace. I have a Y chromosome; content>aesthetics.

I do not like sites that expand their main text to fill the page. It is a friggin' scientific fact that very wide columns are more difficult to read.

However, I thought the main text column was going to stay the same size, and it's definitely shrunk. I happen to still have a window up with the old layout, and in the "Fat in the New Thin" article, the first line of the first non-quote paragraph is this:

That said, if you find that you can only leave your apartment via a crane and a

In the new layout, it's this:

That said, if you find that you can only leave your apartment via

The fact that "a crane and a" got bumped to the second line shows the column is now significantly narrower.

The smaller size might actually be better as far as word count and ease of reading goes, but with the side columns on each side it looks a little cramped. Also, I thought you said at one point it was going to stay the same, so if that was still a goal, then I thought I'd let you know that the "Mission Accomplished" banner you're no doubt thinking of hanging up is a little premature ("Ace lied, pixels died!").

By the way, I agree that lightening the quotes is a good idea, as contrast is good. For that matter, how about doing the same or even going to black-on-white in the comments section? It's so gloomy in here with all the medium gray (which is probably the real reason so many people lurk).

I have a 20-inch screen (iMac), so there are currently three-and a half inches of white margin on either side of the columns. Anyone know how to change the appearance in a Safari browser so the white isn't so overwhelming?

(Go Broncos!)

Ace lied, pixels died!

Good one, Bob

It is a friggin' scientific fact that very wide columns are more difficult to read.

I a gree that a very wide column of text is harder to read, but would appreciate a link to your 'scientific fact', as I do a bit of design work myself, please. A very wide column would be more difficult to read only if the text size remains the same - if the text is larger, it will make the column a bit easier to read because the word count per line would be smaller. I think - and correct me if I'm wrong - that newspapers and such try to limit the number of words in each line in a column to between 5 and 8. So the width of the column AND the size of the text will determine the ease of reading.

Also, I thought you said at one point it was going to stay the same,

Actually, the site is essentially the same with the exception of the additional column - same color scheme, same typeface, same formatting of comments & blockquotes, same information but in three columns. So, "Mission Accomplished" in that respect. The only major issue now is the width of the center column.

I hadn't read all the comments when I posted, so I didn't realize we were actually voting on this. My vote is to leave it close to how it is (the current width or the old width for the main text column).

Furthermore, I think it's clear most of the "wider" votes should be thrown out. Come on, it should be wider to fill your whole screen? That is your reason? What if one day you have a screen that covers a whole wall, will you then demand that the text be eight feet across ("sure, I have to actually walk from one side of the room to the other to read each line, but it makes me happy to know I'm getting full use of my screen")?

When column size is too wide it is harder and more tiring to read. There are two reasons for this. One, your eyes have to travel more (as Ace mentioned). Two, and more importantly, you tend to lose your place if the columns are too big (this is mostly subconscious but sometimes you'll actually notice you're having difficulty finding where you left off).

There are tons of studies showing that narrower columns are much easier to read and produce less reading fatigue. This is settled scientific fact, jack (not just a theory like evolution).

This is why most professional sites have nice, narrow columns, with one exception: Printing. In the case of printing, most people would rather fill the page so they can print something on two pages instead of seven, just because they want to save paper and have less to carry around.

Having to scroll more is a more legitimate complaint. My experience is that people with this complaint never learned to scroll in any way other than hitting the arrow buttons at the top and the bottom of the scroll bar. For people with those limited skills, it is indeed quite a pain to have to keep hitting that button over and over to advance the text one line. Hell, if this were truly the only option, I'd probably agree with them. But it's not, and when people learn how to use the "page down" function (by either hitting the PgDn key or clicking between the scroll bar's thumb and the down arrow) this complaint usually vanishes.

(And, doc, if you have a Y chromosome then you should also value functionality.)

Madfish Willie wrote:

Ace lied, pixels died!

Good one, Bob

Thanks. Hopefully it won't get me called an "asshole" on the front page (heh).

It is a friggin' scientific fact that very wide columns are more difficult to read.

I a gree that a very wide column of text is harder to read, but would appreciate a link to your 'scientific fact', as I do a bit of design work myself, please. A very wide column would be more difficult to read only if the text size remains the same - if the text is larger, it will make the column a bit easier to read because the word count per line would be smaller. I think - and correct me if I'm wrong - that newspapers and such try to limit the number of words in each line in a column to between 5 and 8. So the width of the column AND the size of the text will determine the ease of reading.

By "wide" columns I meant "columns with a lot of words in them", so we're actually in agreement on this (that it's the number of words that matters most). Although I do think there is a point where raw width does become a factor (more eye travel and hence eye fatigue), but the main factor is you have smoothly read narrow columns because you don't lose your spot when going to the next line.

Also, I thought you said at one point it was going to stay the same,

Actually, the site is essentially the same with the exception of the additional column [...] The only major issue now is the width of the center column.

With the word "it" I was referring only to the width of the center column.

I wrote:

Furthermore, I think it's clear most of the "wider" votes should be thrown out. Come on, it should be wider to fill your whole screen? That is your reason? What if one day you have a screen that covers a whole wall, will you then demand that the text be eight feet across ("sure, I have to actually walk from one side of the room to the other to read each line, but it makes me happy to know I'm getting full use of my screen")?

I was kidding there about the votes being thrown out, but in all seriousness I guess that's not too far from what I really believe.

I think while studies have consistently shown that people are able to read narrow columns more smoothly, more quickly, and with less fatigue, it's really something that is not obviously experienced. People don't read wide columns and think, "Oh, this columns are so wide and I'm getting fatigued reading it." They just tend to not enjoy the experience as much and to read more slowly without consciously realizing why that is.

If you don't have that realization, then you're apt when asked to fall back on reasoning like "filling more of the screen is better", but I have no doubt that many people that would request a wider main column would then go on to find reading the site less pleasant (again, without realizing why).

(Note that I'm not saying I'd do any better. If I hadn't read about these readability studies I'd probably be yelling for you to fill the screen, too.)

Bob: As far a readability and considerations for eye fatigue go, the rule of thumb is to use a serif font - the most common being in the Times-Roman typeface family. The type of fonts used in newspapers, books, etc.

However, I find a san serif font is easier to read for shorter blog-post length materials. It's just a personal thing, but I think that if one did a comparison or survey of blog sites, one would agree. Plus it looks a bit "cleaner" - to me anyway.

Wider is always better ...

It's too narrow for me. I'm using Firefox on a 1280x1024 screen, and there are almost 8 cm of white space on each side. I'd prefer if the size of the middle column scaled with the browser window size, which can be done with CSS.

While I'm at it, can the comments boxes be changed to wrap words that go over the box boundaries?

Also, loose shit:
http://validator.w3.org/check?uri=http%3A%2F%2Face.mu.nu%2F

Oh, the above comment was mine. Can we get the "Remember personal info" feature working too?

Wider is better.

I like the wider look. My big issue with the site has always been trying to read it on my Pocket PC. It either spills over the side if fit to screen is not selected or I get to read your posts one word per line if I turn on the fit to screen. The comment boxes seem to resize to the handheld screen well.

Eye fatigue? You're shitting me, right? There's no way the obesity level in this country has gotten so out of hand as to render eye fatigue a legitimate complaint. This is just a stupid moron-blog, it's not like we're scanning the totality of the world's email for terrorist traffic. If you eyes hurt TAKE A FUCKING BREAK. Grab a cup of coffee, take a leak, take a leak in someone else's coffee, whatever.

Ace there's two huge strips of white space on the side of my monitor and they're bugging me. If you can't fill them with pictures of naked women make the damn center column wider. Unless you could put pictures of naked women there, then I would definitely have to vote for narrow.

Some of the html crap doesn't work.

Like Strike or small text

underline

subscriptSubscript

It works in the preview box, not in the actual post

It works in the preview box, not in the actual post

Bart, according to previous whining excuses by Ace, that's an issue that Ace can't control. You should direct your bitching at Pixy, the overlord of the Munuvians (and, as I have discovered on other sites, a hell-bound atheist, so don't expect much).

If it is showing in the preview window, where it would normally be stripped out if it was disallowed, then there must be a bug in Ace's preview comment template that's stripping it out between the preview and post functions.

Testtesttesttest

Ace, if you want to allow these HTML codes, let me know and I'll fix it for you... you left me access a long time ago and just tested them out with my changes to pinpoint the stripping location... I'll change it back now to the original.

Testtesttesttest

I changed it back and rebuilt the indexes and it's working now... WTF?

Ace: How did you do the live preview thingy? I gots to have that!

I'm a friggin idiot... I changed my own blog settings - not Ace's - D'oh!... anyway, I can fix that setting for you Ace if you want to let them do all the stirke, sup, sub, underlining stuff in the comments.

The HTML crap will help my comments to be more pithy. And my comments need all the help they can git.