OK now....

[onthebutton]

pvn,

Don't come in here with your silly little facts and try to hide the injustices we've suffered.

tuq,

<3 that dog.

[Nick B.]

PVN, the posts on this software are centered vertically, the new software, they were just put on the top.

[StevieG]

[ QUOTE ]
Here's two one-liners, side-by-side under the current and the "improved" software:



They are very nearly the same size. The newer style is maybe six pixels bigger. There's more white space because the title bar takes up less space, and because the body text is stuffed up all the way to the top, and the "extras" are gone.

[/ QUOTE ]

True. Now please try that comparison with someone that uses an avatar and a location.

[KurtSF]

Let me put in a vote for keep the old as is.

It was totally unusable for me. I managed to post once, but I had trouble logging in, and for the most part couldn't view or post ANYTHING. 2+2 was totally unusable for me until the "new" forums were taken down.

$0.02

[MrWookie]

[ QUOTE ]
Here's two one-liners, side-by-side under the current and the "improved" software:



They are very nearly the same size. The newer style is maybe six pixels bigger. There's more white space because the title bar takes up less space, and because the body text is stuffed up all the way to the top, and the "extras" are gone.

[/ QUOTE ]

The other thing to note from this post is that, contrary to all the complaints, the font size in the two styles is virtually identical.

[dknightx]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Here's two one-liners, side-by-side under the current and the "improved" software:



They are very nearly the same size. The newer style is maybe six pixels bigger. There's more white space because the title bar takes up less space, and because the body text is stuffed up all the way to the top, and the "extras" are gone.

[/ QUOTE ]

The other thing to note from this post is that, contrary to all the complaints, the font size in the two styles is virtually identical.

[/ QUOTE ]

its more of the fact that the font is LIGHTER and therefore appears smaller. But as another poster pointed out, its nice to actually look at the facts, ie NOT THIS IMAGE.

[onthebutton]

Facts, facts, facts...... Isn't this where we're supposed to be posting about how there is absolutely NO reason to change from the old software? Stay on target people, this is the place for over-exaggeration and uninformed arguments ONLY!

[pvn]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Here's two one-liners, side-by-side under the current and the "improved" software:



They are very nearly the same size. The newer style is maybe six pixels bigger. There's more white space because the title bar takes up less space, and because the body text is stuffed up all the way to the top, and the "extras" are gone.

[/ QUOTE ]

The other thing to note from this post is that, contrary to all the complaints, the font size in the two styles is virtually identical.

[/ QUOTE ]

There's more to readability than font size.

[dknightx]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Here's two one-liners, side-by-side under the current and the "improved" software:



They are very nearly the same size. The newer style is maybe six pixels bigger. There's more white space because the title bar takes up less space, and because the body text is stuffed up all the way to the top, and the "extras" are gone.

[/ QUOTE ]

The other thing to note from this post is that, contrary to all the complaints, the font size in the two styles is virtually identical.

[/ QUOTE ]

There's more to readability than font size.

[/ QUOTE ]

pvn, otb doesn't want to hear about THESE facts, just ones that support his side.

[onthebutton]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Here's two one-liners, side-by-side under the current and the "improved" software:



They are very nearly the same size. The newer style is maybe six pixels bigger. There's more white space because the title bar takes up less space, and because the body text is stuffed up all the way to the top, and the "extras" are gone.

[/ QUOTE ]

The other thing to note from this post is that, contrary to all the complaints, the font size in the two styles is virtually identical.

[/ QUOTE ]

There's more to readability than font size.

[/ QUOTE ]

pvn, otb doesn't want to hear about THESE facts, just ones that support his side.

[/ QUOTE ]

You guys are complaining about strictly cosmetic issues that probably could have (and would have) been easily tweaked. It's fairly obvious to anyone that there is more to readability than font size ( <font color="white"> OMG I can't read this it's in white!) </font> ), I don't disagree with that. Mat and others have made it clear that a change HAS TO HAPPEN because this version of the software isn't adequate for the needs of this forum. It seems a very similar user interface (like people here are asking for) isn't available with software that will fit the needs of 2+2. Touting user interface advantages of software that will soon be non-functional because it can't handle the traffic 2p2 experiences vs. the user interface of software that can handle the load seems kind of dumb to me.

A much better conversation would be one comparing software that is appropriate for 2p2, but that involves change, and some of you donkeys can't handle that.