New look?

9 posts / 0 new
Last post
Last seen: 13 years 1 week ago
Joined: Oct 24 2004 - 00:43
New look?

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.

...'s picture
Last seen: 12 years 2 months ago
Joined: Nov 30 2004 - 05:07
Leave it as it is!

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?

Some Examples:

As the tag goes: Obscure, Unusual, Exceptional. Perhaps you could add unique on the end?

Last seen: 10 years 12 months ago
Joined: Oct 13 2004 - 19:49
Oh, and...

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.

Last seen: 10 years 12 months ago
Joined: Oct 13 2004 - 19:49

I for got to ask the question: what was that blue theme? Can't it stay?

token's picture
Last seen: 9 months 4 days ago
Joined: Dec 20 2003 - 10:38
Re: New look?

timmyishot wrote:
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.

Hokusai's picture
Last seen: 7 months 4 weeks ago
Joined: Dec 20 2003 - 10:38

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.

Last seen: 1 year 11 months ago
Joined: Mar 19 2005 - 22:24
Keep the logo

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.

BDub's picture
Last seen: 10 months 4 weeks ago
Joined: Dec 20 2003 - 10:38
Skinnable is quite 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.


Jon's picture
Last seen: 7 years 3 weeks ago
Joined: Dec 20 2003 - 10:38
I aree w/ BDub. Too many gra

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?

Log in or register to post comments