Personaly, I think the looke should resemble the graphite apperance look of OS X. That would make it look less childish and more of a true hackers site.
I prefer the look of applefritter to any other forums site around. And anyway, there are already a few site that mimic the look of the OSX / 9 Gui so why create another one?
As the tag goes: Obscure, Unusual, Exceptional. Perhaps you could add unique on the end?
When AF loads, there's a bluish theme, and quickly dissapears with the entrance of the rainbow stuff. It did stay once, but I never saw it again.
I for got to ask the question: what was that blue theme? Can't it stay?
make it look less childish and more of a true hackers site.
I don't think the 'fritter looks childish at all. Aquafied websites are a dime a dozen.
Maybe you should have a nice gray look to it. Gray is good. Not so radical as a red or a blue. Just in the middle. No one can argue with that.
Keep the logo the same, regardless of the "skin". I like the way the current AF logo "echoes" the color Apple logo.
BTW, how about making AF "skinnable"? That way everyone can have their favorite, and the default can be the same as the way it looks now. Some other sites have an arrangement like that, so it has already been proven that it is do-able.
Skinnable is quite do-able. Drupal has support built in.
The bluish loading is the the theme that I modified to create the current one. We can get rid of it if you like.
I'm not sure if Tom wants it to be themeable. If he does, it's just a few clicks to enable some.
I'd disagree about an Aqua look. We aren't Apple. We take Apple computers and make them look like something else entirely. Why shouldn't our site look like something else entirely?
Besides, I work for a website that feels the need to load each page down with far too many graphics. I appreciate the quick load of Applefritter. It's not just different, it's better.
I aree w/ BDub. Too many graphics slow a page way down. A site is about the conetent, not the pretty graphics that someone slapped on to make new users go "oh-ah" until they see there isn't much there. Many of the most useful and best sites on the net use very few graphics. IMHO and a true decade+ for online experience under my belt the three magic words fo the internet, kinda like realty, are Content, Content, Content! Everything else is just fluff. And don't make the mistake of thinking that users on high speed don't care about graphically intense sites, 'cause they can see them so fast. Independence was in the frist block of cities that Comcast gave 3MBit cable service. I was still on them when it was started. Many sites that had alot of graphics spent alot of time waiting for the servers to respond and send the dang files. I was out running servers as a home end user. Graphics can choke down a site on both the server end and the user end. How much bandwidth can a site save by cutting out that 200K of grahic menu fluff and using a simple text setup (ie. AF) if the menu is shown at the top of every page?