Site updates continuing, comments welcomed | iLounge News


Site updates continuing, comments welcomed

Update as of Saturday, April 9 at 2:09PM PST: We are aware that a significant number of our readers are experiencing formatting issues with the new homepage on different browsers, and we’re working hard to fix them. There will be a number of additional tweaks to the main page over the next 24-48 hours to further improve layout and readability, so stay tuned.

A picture of the homepage as it generally should display on your monitor can now be viewed by clicking on Read More below. If it is not displaying in this way, your browser is likely set to display fonts at an unusual size, and most layout issues can be temporarily fixed by adjusting downwards to “normal” font settings.

And yes, the navigation bar will soon be fully functional. Instead of drop-down menus, the gray bar will change contextually by section (news, articles, free music, etc) to let you jump to the preferred sub-section below.


« President Bush’s iPod: 250 Songs, Downloaded by Others

Say hello to the new iLounge »

Related Stories



Sorry if I don’t feel like changing my web browsing preferences so that your page displays correctly. A correctly formatted web page should gracefully degrade regardless of the viewer’s preferences for font type or size. I appreciate that you guys are working on the display issues but the suggestion that we adjust our preferences to what you consider “normal” is somewhat offensive. I sincerely doubt I’ll be changing how all web pages look just to make yours display better.

Posted by jparris1 on April 9, 2005 at 6:31 PM (CDT)


I had a quick look at your XHTML and CSS and do not know why someone should change the font preferences in the browser. You are using absolute values (px) for your typo so there should be no problem. I verified your site on Firefox 1.01 (OS X) and Safari 1.2.4 (OS X) and it looks almost good on both browsers ;-) Anyway, you are using the FONT tag in your XHTML. You should change this to a SPAN because FONT is not a part of the XHTML specifications. Maybe this helps… Think you made the right decision to use slim XHTML code instead of tables but to make it look good on all browsers is very challenging. So good luck to you guys.

Posted by chilloutbrother on April 9, 2005 at 7:10 PM (CDT)


Oh to see what it looks like in my browser check out:

Posted by jparris1 on April 9, 2005 at 7:50 PM (CDT)


wayyyyyy to cramped and busy.
i vote to bring back the old look.
change isn’t always better.

it actually hurts to try to navigate.

Posted by neuroticomic on April 9, 2005 at 8:00 PM (CDT)


You offed us. 

Why do i have to change font or switch browser?  The older site worked perfectly under any browser and used the whole screen, not just a little strip of text in the middle with two white blanks on the side.

I call this iPodlounge Landing Strip Edition (so narrow it resembles a landing strip or thong). This new desing looks dated, the older site was much more modern.

Posted by Fzara2000 on April 9, 2005 at 8:11 PM (CDT)


In the future, it might be a good idea to create a BETA version of the new site and let certain users [chosen at random] to check it out and offer feedback.  This is the way many other sites deal with redesign.

Posted by petro on April 9, 2005 at 8:31 PM (CDT)


Bad decision guys. The site looks terrible. So hard to read. You better go back to the old style. I’m not changing my font. You lost me, I’ll use other iPod sites until you get your act together. What were you thinking? No test run or beta or feed back. You changing the site name to THONG.COM? That name fits your new style.

Posted by ricobird on April 9, 2005 at 8:51 PM (CDT)


i liked the old layout better…  the headlines and new reviews at the top with links to the expanded stories made more sense than scrolling down to find them on the new site.  i think that the new site looks good, but that functionality was lost for the sake of aesthetics.

Posted by docslytherin on April 9, 2005 at 8:58 PM (CDT)


I like the new layout, but agree that the extra scrolling isn’t as efficient. Positioning of the newbie info is much improved, though. Perhaps if they find their info quicker, it will cut down on extraneous messages in the forums. Once I get over my muscle memory for the old site, I think I will like this.

Posted by Aceon6 in New England, USA on April 9, 2005 at 9:26 PM (CDT)


There will be new reviews at the top with links. The current layout is just placeholder.

Posted by Jeremy Horwitz in East Amherst, NY, USA on April 9, 2005 at 9:27 PM (CDT)


please change it back. I FREAKIN HATE THE NEW DESIGN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! it’s icky. could you at least add a link so that we can view the site in the old format?

Posted by punkrockavocado in VA on April 9, 2005 at 9:36 PM (CDT)


I agree with jparris1. There should be no need for the end user to change browser prefs to fit a site design. Users will simply go elsewhere, which is sad, because ipodlounge is such a great resource.

Also, I see the banner ad at the very top of the page, not under the iPodLounge main logo.

Posted by ash8080 in Florida, USA on April 9, 2005 at 10:13 PM (CDT)


The “landing strip” look is not good. I paid for a 17” monitor why cant I use it?

It has also somehow caused some other sites I have looked at after looking at this one to have the same problem. They are now in landing strip format as well !! Thanks alot.

Anyone know how to fix this?

By browser is Safari 1.2.4 on OS X 10.3.8.

Oh another problem ... when I click the back button on my browser it takes me to the temporary page you had up yesterday showing the buyers guide. I have cleared my history but somehow I get yesterdays page.

Posted by Cyberwhore in Perth on April 9, 2005 at 10:26 PM (CDT)


You can also discuss the site updates :)

Posted by ipodman715 on April 9, 2005 at 10:48 PM (CDT)


I have to agree with the majority, the old design did look better.

Posted by Mani on April 9, 2005 at 11:02 PM (CDT)


I gotta agree. And on a site dedicated to an Apple product it makes even less sense. Every new Machintosh computer has a wide-screen display, except those hat don’t come with a monitor. A thin little strip makes even less sense.

Posted by shaun3000 on April 9, 2005 at 11:36 PM (CDT)


Ummm… Apple’s own web site is fixed width… what is your point on a web site having to do with Apple products should use the width of a wide screen product (I am writing this from a 15” Powerbook with external 23” display).

Also being on the web since early 1994, I have to say that doing a site redesign by beta testing it with users is like using committees in a educational institution to make choices about something, you end up with a group of people that never end up agreeing and nothing gets done.  Many people have voiced they like the new site design, and many have voiced they hate it.  You will never get everyone to agree on anything.  Some people don’t mind the ads, others block them (great way to support this wonderful free service by the way, if you block the ads then they get paid less, and more likely to go away in the future… thanks for leeching and risking the future of this site for the rest of us…)

Do you guys really browse sites full screen? I tend to have a ton of different windows open and there are so many fixed width sites it just works.  Oh and for some of you, there are not big white bars on the sides of the site, its called the site is centered on the browser window… if you shrink your browser a little the “white bars” get smaller, its not like they set fixed width white bars of 300px wide to force you to have a huge white area on each side or something.

Posted by StevenB on April 10, 2005 at 12:17 AM (CDT)


I usually browse full screen and have other windows on top. I don’t think it should be formatted for widescreen but the old design atleast fit whatever resolution you were using. This one is a set size regardless of resolution. And it doesn’t seem to work for good number of people.

Posted by shaun3000 on April 10, 2005 at 12:22 AM (CDT)


Personally, I don’t mind for either site design (old or new.) People are making a fuss over nothing. These same people will get used to it, and forget about it. Happens in every redesign…

Actually, the old design was a bit cramped (maybe a lot.) The cleaner design, to me, is worth it.

Posted by chris21 in NY on April 10, 2005 at 12:41 AM (CDT)


i was pretty used to the old design, but i’m open to change. However, please bring back the Joy Of Tech box! I had my ad blockers all customised to avoid it, but block other ads. Thanks,

ps i hope the new rss works with pod2go

Posted by peterburk in Geneva, Switzerland on April 10, 2005 at 2:12 AM (CDT)

Page 1 of 3 pages  1 2 3 > 

If you have a comment, news tip, advertising inquiry, or coverage request, a question about iPods/iPhones/iPad or accessories, or if you sell or market iPod/iPhone/iPad products or services, read iLounge's Comments + Questions policies before posting, and fully identify yourself if you do. We will delete comments containing advertising, astroturfing, trolling, personal attacks, offensive language, or other objectionable content, then ban and/or publicly identify violators.

Commenting is not available in this channel entry.
Sign up for the iLounge Weekly Newsletter


Recent News

Recent Reviews

Recent Articles

Sign up for the iLounge Weekly Newsletter


iLounge is an independent resource for all things iPod, iPhone, iPad, and beyond.
iPod, iPhone, iPad, iTunes, Apple TV, Mac, and the Apple logo are trademarks of Apple Inc.
iLounge is © 2001 - 2014 iLounge, Inc. All Rights Reserved. Terms of Use | Privacy Policy