Jump to content
  • Sign Up to reply and join the friendliest Watch Forum on the web. Stick around, get to 50 posts and gain access to your full profile and additional features such as a personal messaging system, chat room and the sales forum PLUS the chance to enter our regular giveaways.
Sign in to follow this  
William_Wilson

Observations.

Recommended Posts

Since the changes to the forum I have noticed a few things.

1) Pages seem to take longer to load now.
2) The forum display width was narrow, then wide and has now become narrow again.
3) When I am on the front page and click on a thread within a sub-forum I am sometimes taken to the last post I have previously read and other times to the first post on the first page.

Later,
William

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's interesting. I have no problems with pages loading, I have a 14" screen and the width covers the whole page, can't comment on point 3, but still having an issue with the like button. 50% of the time, I get a message saying I don't have permission to like a post, but when I leave the page and return, the like has been recorded. Had that problem before the changes as well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Will take a look into these points later. 

With regard to the page width, it will be a little narrower than the old yellow and blue theme...I'll confirm what you should expect to see later as well. 

Page load time...shouldn't have been affected anywhere except the home page, as there is a new banner module which does pull it's resources from elsewhere. However, the rest of the page should load while it waits for the banners. 

Not sure about point three, no changes made would have affected this functionality but, again, will check later.

Any more info or specific examples always helps :thumbsup:

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've also noticed that when I click on a page I have previously read I am not taking to the last post read, just the beginning of the thread, no biggy to me but thought it might be worth pointing out.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, mach 0.0013137 said:

As you can see William, TWF`s Computer Nerd Technical Supervisor is on the case...

 

latest?cb=20101124091256

 

Sorry Dave  :laugh:

I shall be reporting your post as I've explicitly asked you not to share your stored images of me publicly. 

The fact you keep images of me is also rather disturbing.

:swoon:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Krispy said:

I shall be reporting your post as I've explicitly asked you not to share your stored images of me publicly. 

The fact you keep images of me is also rather disturbing.

:swoon:

I can assure you Dave that I do not have a copy of that image saved on my Computer, I found it on a website dedicated to Computer Nerds which I came across when I googled your name this morning :laugh:

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Right Mr @William_Wilson, let's deal with the easy one first.

Page width.  The width of the page will fill the screen up to about 1400px (1370px to be precise).  After it expands to that width it will fix and the background will appear, filling the rest of the screen.

Is that what you see?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For the sake of clarity, I'll provide some insight into the basic nature of my computer:

system1.jpg

system2.jpg

I only use Microsoft browsers, Edge generally, not Wondersocks 3000 or any of those other third party things.

12 minutes ago, Krispy said:

Right Mr @William_Wilson, let's deal with the easy one first.

Page width.  The width of the page will fill the screen up to about 1400px (1370px to be precise).  After it expands to that width it will fix and the background will appear, filling the rest of the screen.

Is that what you see?

I would say so. I run at 1920 x 1080.

Just to add to the fun:
4) Pages with a great many embedded YouTube players do seem to take longer to load, and reducing default player size does not seem to have reduced it significantly, if at all.

I'm a ray of sunshine! :laugh:

Later,
William

Edited by William_Wilson
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Constructive feedback is always welcome!  Moaners are generally ignored or matters made worse for them, just for fun.

There doesn't seem to be much basic in the nature of your machine, you're clearly lacking pen and / or touch in put though. :rolleyes:

I'm clinging on to Win7 for as long as I can so have only tested up to IE 11 where general performance is on a par with chrome, firefox and safari and the CSS is handled fine in them all from what I can tell.

I'm running at the same res as you and this is what I see:

Capture221.JPG

 

Happy for point 2 to be closed?

Point 4 - I agree, something has happened to the way embedded video content is handled.  At around the same time as the new theme, an upgrade to the forum software took place too so I need to work out which one is causing the issue.

Point 1 - I'm looking at page loads and timings.  The homepage is the heaviest and on first load (with no caching, e.g. by doing a hard refresh with CTRL+F5) it's loading in under 2 secs for me.  Subsequent loading is much quicker as most of the page is cached.  The slowest performing part of the page is the links sidebar as the thumbnail images are served via API from a 3rd party system.  I think I can sort that by forcing them to be stored locally instead.

Where do you feel the page loads are longer?  In general or on specific pages - e.g. forum list pages, topics, etc (excluding the media heavy pages)?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, Krispy said:

Constructive feedback is always welcome!  Moaners are generally ignored or matters made worse for them, just for fun.

There doesn't seem to be much basic in the nature of your machine, you're clearly lacking pen and / or touch in put though. :rolleyes:

I'm clinging on to Win7 for as long as I can so have only tested up to IE 11 where general performance is on a par with chrome, firefox and safari and the CSS is handled fine in them all from what I can tell.

I'm running at the same res as you and this is what I see:

Capture221.JPG

 

Happy for point 2 to be closed?

Point 4 - I agree, something has happened to the way embedded video content is handled.  At around the same time as the new theme, an upgrade to the forum software took place too so I need to work out which one causing the issue.

Point 1 - I'm looking at page loads and timings.  The homepage is the heaviest and on first load (with no caching, e.g. by doing a hard refresh with CTRL+F5) it's loading in under 2 secs for me.  Subsequent loading is much quicker as most of the page is cached.  The slowest performing part of the page is the links sidebar as the thumbnail images are served via API from a 3rd party system.  I think I can sort that by forcing them to be stored locally instead.

Where do you feel the page loads are longer?  In general or on specific pages - e.g. forum list pages, topics, etc (excluding the media heavy pages)?

I noticed the front page is loading a tiny bit quicker today. The pages below it were not a real issue, as their load times were not significantly increased. BTW... My connection with the telephone company's switch is consistent.

As far as width of the active part of the screen is concerned I'm not worried... but on a 25 inch monitor running 1920 x 1080 you have to bump up text size up to 125% to be comfortable with it.

Later,
William

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, William_Wilson said:

As far as width of the active part of the screen is concerned I'm not worried... but on a 25 inch monitor running 1920 x 1080 you have to bump up text size up to 125% to be comfortable with it.

That's interesting and I hadn't considered that. I'm using a 27" and kept the font sizes the same as previous.

If you run this emulator on your larger screen, would you say it's a fair representation of what you see on you 25"? 

http://quirktools.com/screenfly/#u=http%3A//www.thewatchforum.co.uk/index.php%3F/topic/103913-observations/%23comment-1076179&w=1920&h=1200&a=1

These emulators can never be fully trusted so if not, I'll dig out an old monitor...

EDIT: Scrap that - I think it's only adjusting the resolution and not taking into account the actual screen size...

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
55 minutes ago, Krispy said:

That's interesting and I hadn't considered that. I'm using a 27" and kept the font sizes the same as previous.

If you run this emulator on your larger screen, would you say it's a fair representation of what you see on you 25"? 

http://quirktools.com/screenfly/#u=http%3A//www.thewatchforum.co.uk/index.php%3F/topic/103913-observations/%23comment-1076179&w=1920&h=1200&a=1

These emulators can never be fully trusted so if not, I'll dig out an old monitor...

EDIT: Scrap that - I think it's only adjusting the resolution and not taking into account the actual screen size...

I'm running a 60" monitor so it doesn't really matter that much to me, though I do like to get as much out my equipment as I can. Now on the other hand, people using smaller 1920 x 1080 monitors (rather common now) may have a somewhat different experience with the 28% of unused screen. Anyway, if it is impractical to change - so be it. :)

Later,
William

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, William_Wilson said:

I'm running a 60" monitor so it doesn't really matter that much to me, though I do like to get as much out my equipment as I can. Now on the other hand, people using smaller 1920 x 1080 monitors (rather common now) may have a somewhat different experience with the 28% of unused screen. Anyway, if it is impractical to change - so be it. :)

Later,
William

Unused?! How dare you, there's a lovely faded image of a watch movement to revel in!

It's not difficult to change and happy to take people's view on it.

As an example, if you refresh and switch the theme to 'The Watch Forum Wide' it should be back to how it was previously (the banners would need redoing, that's all)

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, William_Wilson said:

It seems right on the money with the wide theme. :thumbsup: 

The banner is good as well.

Later,
William

Glad you like it, I'm not happy with those banners though!

Theme suitably renamed.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Krispy said:

Glad you like it, I'm not happy with those banners though!

Theme suitably renamed.

What aspects of the banners? Resource requirements, size or aesthetics?

Later,
William

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Since the changes to the forum I have noticed a few things.

3) When I am on the front page and click on a thread within a sub-forum I am sometimes taken to the last post I have previously read and other times to the first post on the first page.

Later,
William

 

On 7/14/2016 at 11:24, graham1981 said:

I've also noticed that when I click on a page I have previously read I am not taking to the last post read, just the beginning of the thread, no biggy to me but thought it might be worth pointing out.

How's this for you now? Should now always take you to the last post read.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

William...everything working fine here.....your computer is rub (son speak for 'rubbish')......buy a new, modern one that doesn't have valves, a lead acid battery to power it and a steam generator.....:rofl:

BTW...we have colour now, are you still in B & W?:rolleyes:

As ever......just jestin' with you, no offence meant, Will...:thumbsup:

Edited by Roger the Dodger

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Roger the Dodger said:

William...everything working fine here.....your computer is rub (son speak for 'rubbish')......buy a new, modern one that doesn't have valves, a lead acid battery to power it and a steam generator.....:rofl:

BTW...we have colour now, are you still in B & W?:rolleyes:

As ever......just jestin' with you, no offence meant, Will...:thumbsup:

Roger, does your son think it should be smaller or faster? The things I do with this machine need bigger, faster and more. A meaningful upgrade would be to a Xeon E5-2687WV4 dual processor system which would likely end up costing $12,000 - $15,000... so after he pays his car insurance off I'll accept donations with a smile. :biggrin: 

Seriously though, this machine seems to run Doom 2016 with better overall results than the consoles can achieve. :wink:

A note to Krispy:

The wide theme seems to have reverted to the standard width. What is different is that the RLT banner displays larger top to bottom and scrolls the rest of the page downward and then it scrolls back up when the other banners pop up.

Later,
William

Edited by William_Wilson
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, William_Wilson said:

A note to Krispy:

The wide theme seems to have reverted to the standard width. What is different is that the RLT banner displays larger top to bottom and scrolls the rest of the page downward and then it scrolls back up when the other banners pop up.

Later,
William

:ooops:

How is it now?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...