Metblogs had some work done

Looks like someone had a li'l nip 'n' tuck over the weekend at Metroblogging. I love it when a favorite site-of-sites like this gets even better, automagically.


  1. The psuedo-3d world map is a good idea (love the sea monster!), and I would prefer if the distortion makes the dense Northern hemisphere bigger rather than smaller, which is counter-functional. The Japanese Empire rays behind the logo is a little tired, in my opinion.

    I’ll check out the site, thanks for the heads up!

  2. I love the little sea-serpent! I thought I was the only person left who still stuck those olde-tymie grotesqueries into modern maps. Nice to know there’s a kindred spirit out there.

  3. I was disappointed to find the little “other lands” sign wasn’t clickable :(

    Maybe It could have been to an off-site links page, or something more fun.

    I really like the design and concept of the site though. Its a great idea.

  4. They need a lesson in geography. They place Sacramento directly east of San Jose, and San Francisco significantly north of both of them. Minneapolis appears to be northeast of Chicago.

    Or maybe this is just a product of the “old-timey” maps.

  5. A site too wide for the most common monitor resolution?

    What kind of buggy are you driving? I have the same sized monitor that I’ve had since 2000 and the site doesn’t take up the whole width.

  6. Definitely too wide. Many laptops (like mine!) only have a 1024px wide screen. That said, I’d say any layout that requires more than 640 pixels in width is doing something wrong – not necessarily because people won’t have high enough resolution, but because it makes your site less flexible. Sometimes I put two firefox windows next to each other to compare things, for example, or I just need to crank up the font sizes to read something. And of course, more and more people read web pages on tiny screens – subnotebooks, handhelds, cell phones. A shame about this site…

  7. Does anyone know of a similar site for regional, American or global, blogs? I help edit one on Appalachia and would be very interested in participating in such a site, or its creation if one doesn’t exist.

  8. i’m reading about 945px wide for the central column. which is just less than 5/8ths of my laptop screen width.

    Its a small inconvience for a 1024px screen (nightmare for any 800×600 cats still out there), but with the constant shift forward in pixelwidth and bandwidth, there will be early adopters of the new standards in every field, and slowly the pace move on.

    I mean, it’s not that long ago the average site-content-load crossed the broadband mark from the dial-up standard. Similarly, not so long ago that 800×600 was the standard browser resolution target for web design.

  9. I’d say any layout that requires more than 640 pixels in width is doing something wrong.

    My monitor resolution is 1280 x 1024. 640 would take up only half the width. I like a lot of white space, but that’s an awful lot. And for someone with 1600 x 1200, it would be like reading ticker tape. Isn’t it sort of Luddite to design for the most backward equipment?

  10. Curmudgeons all! I like it and I like that someone took the time and effort to make something good better.

  11. Click on the Dragon and it puffs smoke. Click on the airplane and it flies to Africa. Click on the ship and it sinks.

    Cool, I tell ya’.

  12. I wonder how one can join the team of authors…there are rarelly new posts for Singapore eg, and im blogging on a daily basis :)
    Any ideas?

  13. meh.

    The map was pretty, but it doesn’t really do anything that I could tell — mousing over the dots doesn’t even show the names of the cities, clicking them makes the page reload. And why is this map pushing all the content off my screen? And when I do scroll down, there’s nothing there suggesting it actually deserves to be read. No content == for sure I will never visit again.

    The super-wide fixed-width requirement is a terrible idea. Even people with screens that big don’t necessarily like to browse with their browsers super-maximized. It *really* isn’t hard to do things like use % sizes for things, obviously this is Flash content so it would scale perfectly if they’d done that.

    I guess it’s just a corporate branding site and they don’t care about these things. Is the whole point just a fancy way of saying “Here is a list of our blogs”? Compare to something like EveryBlock which is doing so much more.

Comments are closed.