Boing Boing: The World's Greatest Neurozine!


One night more than twenty years ago, Mark Frauenfelder and Carla Sinclair fired up the photocopy machine at Mark's work and cranked out the first issue of bOING bOING, the print 'zine.* (Our new/old hand-drawn logotype at the top of this page is from that era!) Since those heady, dot matrix days of staples, stamps, and cyberpunks, quite a lot has changed. But some things haven't. Click to 2009. We're just a few months from our ten year anniversary as a blog, and are proud to have nearly 70,000 posts in the archives. We're honored that millions of people resonate with Boing Boing's take on technology, culture, and high weirdness. Thank you for your continued support. But as happy mutants, we must continue to evolve. And so we're pleased to present this re-imagining of Boing Boing.

As you probably noticed, we have a new design. Our goal with it is to highlight our most exciting, provocative, anomalous, and newsworthy posts, even after they've floated down the blog river off the front page. So, please do check out the "display case" of featured stories at the top and right of the site. Speaking of features, there will be more of those. Of course, we'll keep curating and contextualizing the most interesting things we find online, but we're also going back to bOING bOING's 'zine roots by presenting originally-reported articles. Who's writing those? We are, and the "we" is expanding in marvelous ways. We're thrilled to have several fantastic, and familiar, voices joining us on the front page:

• Rob Beschizza and Lisa Katayama, two of our favorite tech writers in the world, are shifting their efforts from BB Gadgets to the front page of Boing Boing. If you're a BB Gadgets reader, don't fret -- now all of that material will be hosted right here. Meanwhile, Rob and Lisa will also get a chance to go beyond the gadget realm to explore the other microuniverses that fascinate them. Rob is also busy as Boing Boing's first ever managing editor -- he does a masterful job of keeping us all in line, even if that line is quite curvy.

• Over at Offworld, Brandon Boyer has spent months charting the esoteric interzone of indie games. Henceforth, he'll also post columns and game reviews at Boing Boing that showcase the best bets for pixelated pleasure.

• Earlier this year, Maggie Koerth-Baker spent two weeks as a guestblogger and delighted us with revelations about giant squid, nasty cytokine storms, and parasites we should know and love. Now, Maggie will be here every day feeding our insatiable appetite for weird science, natural curiosities, odd anthropology, and the edges of eco-tech.

This relaunch was a major undertaking, and several people deserve a tip of the ol' propeller beanie: Rob Beschizza lit a fire under us, did the design, managed its implementation, and kept us calm. He is a creative force of quantum proportions. Master coder Dean Putney did the vast majority of the software development. As always, our stellar sysadmin, Ken Snider, kept things humming in the Jefferies tubes. Thanks to George Triantafyllakos, creator of BPreplay, the open source font we're using for headlines. And thank you to our partner John Battelle, our friend Jason Weisberger, and Federated Media's Mugs Buckley, Neil Chase, and Pete Spande for their business sense (and cents).

So with that, we hope you enjoy this evolutionary leap. Welcome back to Boing Boing: the brain mutator for higher primates.

(* Mark insists he reimbursed his former employer for the paper and toner!)


  1. Love it. Great treat for a lashing miserable Tuesday morning lads. Ta for all the hard work ^_^

  2. Awww, bb has gotten its very own “2.0”. Well, as long as you fix the links (top navigation: business(!) etc), I think we can get used to ignoring the 90% teasers and read the 10% content in the new design.

  3. Argh! everything’s different – whats going on!?

    OK, I’ll say it. The new design is hackit. But nothing will ever stop me loving boinboing.

    I’ll give it some time – it can take a while to get used to these things…

    1. I agree with kiddr01, but not to be discouraging.
      I also wouldn’t stop reading boing boing. One of
      the best sites that has stuck with it throughout all the years.

  4. I don’t like it, but I suppose I’ll get used to it.
    Pity that all websites are starting to look alike.

    (also not a fan of the font you use for headlines, it renders very badly in Opera)

  5. In before the complainers… oh too late.

    Change is scary, especially when unexpected. My first reaction is ‘I don’t like it’. My second reaction is ‘in 2 weeks I won’t remember how it used to be and my feelings will be the same as they were before the change.

    And I come to this bloody website every day so you guys must be doing something right.

  6. Still plenty of design tweaks and fixes coming! We had a mighty tussle with our MT installation getting things upgraded last night (as a few of you noticed on twitter) so a few things will still be wonky.

  7. I think it’s gonna grow on me. The bubble font is rendering a little aliasy in smaller forms (like in the ‘recently’ section below comments.

    But man, oh, man, I like it.

    And Latente, don’t be mean to BPReplay! You’ll hurt its feelings.

  8. FYI – links to profiles don’t seem to be working.

    Also can i suggest you increase the line spacing of the text in quotes – it’s very tight.

    that’s my only major grumble..

    : )

  9. The layout is okay and all, but I can’t shake the feeling I’m reading the LARGE PRINT Reader’s Digest…

  10. My mousewheel finger is already getting tired from all the scrolling… please reconsider a smaller text size.

  11. I love the new (old?) logo. I don’t read BB by RSS so I’m always delighted by new designs. Great to hear about more reportage. The BBV work Xeni has been bringing in has been delightful as have the diverse perspectives of the guest editors. Onwards and upwards! Great guns!

  12. Hi,
    I agree with the comments above on the fonts.
    Overall the fonts used are too big and the red, bold font used for comment titles is poorly defined (blurry).

  13. I like it, right away. Very nicely done. I never really had much love for that last re-design, but this one is kicking my ass. Thank you mutants! Looking forward to the new developments.

  14. Guess I’m not the only one whose eyes need help as I age. Looks like BB people are denying the need for specs with some bigger fonts.

  15. Whoa! Talk about a surprise to wake up to. I guess, as the infamous reply made about about Fark’s redesign a few years ago…”You’ll get over it”. I think I will. Maybe make the links on the side and the top a little smaller? They kinda overwhelm the main article space-thing. The logo is a little small as well.

  16. I hate it. It looks like all the Big Media pages now. (Plus, since I go through this via Google Reader’s RSS -> Next function, I get to see the stupid links I don’t care about because I’ve already read them, every single time.)

  17. Love the new layout, its clean and improves usability. But the logotype is a big glaring backwards step, the old one said so much with its form. I understand your nostalgia but I really hope you’ll rethink it – the previous logotype would look superb with this layout.

    Also, how come I can’t cuss? I like cussing. It adds emphasis and street cred all at the same time.

  18. Oh and I see you’ve got rid of the latest comments module in the right column. Is that a good idea? That was a neat little barometer of what was generating discourse. Now you’re just kind of pushing me to a bunch of stuff that got used up last week. Good stuff, but all talked out.

    I think this will muffle the community a bit.

  19. We have an improved “latest comments” module in the works. Also, the sidebar teasers will soon be ordered by “hot thread” status, so they’ll be indicators of where debate RAGES rather than just the most recent featured items.

  20. @Latente: I’ve that problem too (Firefox, WinXP). I tried Internet Explorer and there it looks fine. It is a very ugly font, especially in the little showcase boxes, apparently there’s no anti-aliasing. I looked at the CSS and there’s a mention of BPreplayBold font. So, Firefox is working right by loading that font and IE isn’t. There are certainly good uses for that font, but IMHO this webpage isn’t one of them.

    This screenshot shows what I mean:
    You took a bold step, but the font is just too bold for the little boxes.

    For my taste, the show case boxes are a little too big and take focus away from the articles. It will get annoying when you first

    BTW, wasn’t there comment numbering? That was quite useful when replying to a specific comment, like my first sentence in this one.

    The individual article pages are lacking their title.

    There’s also a problem when previewing your comment, instead of submitting it. Your text is shown twice.

    All in all, I must say that the wider text area is filling the space more efficiently and looks good.

    1. Excellent job on removing the comment numbering (this always caused headaches) the new ‘reply’ to comment button is much better, it’s nice having a link directly to the comment in question!

      I love the new/old logo. Love the fact that as you scroll further down the posts are reduced in the 2 stages, nice way to fit more posts on the front page without having to scroll forever.

      The top is a little cluttered, but I’m sure I will quickly become used to this.

      I will be sad to see Offworld and BBG die off. It was nice to have those in separate, less commented forums.

      My only big complaint though is fucking heading font. (Sorry about the cussing [Not sure if this is a new policy or what, but I preferred the “we’re adults and can handle the odd F or S” approach]). Anyway the font is terrible and renders poorly, especially when re-sizing the text.

      All in all, I’m actually glad for the re-design. I got sick of always having to click the previous page (or 2 or 3) of posts if I didn’t get the chance to read BB for a day or so.

  21. I like it in general, but the headline font hurts my eyes. The low-fi print look is cool and all, but it hurts the functionality of actually reading the site.

  22. I have to say, I don’t think the front page design works. The boxes at the top and at the side are very, very distracting. I find it very difficult to read the first post right now.

    The first and biggest reason is that all of the boxes with the posts you’re featuring are colored black and completely overwhelm the rest of the page. If they were a light grey (or just white) they’d be much better. Right now my eye is drawn to the corner of the ‘L’ formed by the boxes, and I can’t read anything starting there.

    The second reason is that the boxes are much too tight around the post content. Needs a lot more spacing on top and at the sides. There’s also no clear visual indicator of when the first post starts.

    The third reason is that there are now far too many pictures on screen and my eyes just keep jumping between them. I think you can have pictures on the side or on top, but both is just overwhelming me.

    One other little thing: the boxes on the side can’t be clicked. You have to click links inside them. This seems counter-intuitive to me, especially since the boxes at the top can be clicked.

    Those are my design concerns. I also have to say I don’t really like rounded sans-serif fonts much, so I’m not a big fan of the title text.

    I also have to say I’m very sad that Offworld has been merged in and there’s no way to separate what-would-have-been Offworld content at all. Offworld was one of the best gaming blogs on the internet.

  23. The new boing boing logo is no bueno. At the very least it’s waaaaay too small to be the title of the webpage. It’s smaller than the advertisement above it so it looks like an advertisement thus falls prey to selective reading. Also the sans fonts for the headings are cool, but contrasted with the old set it seems like a step backwards in classiness.

    I love you boingboing and I love your success, but this isn’t change for the better :(

  24. I like the new design, but not the new logo. I was preparing myself to accept the new logo, but the trip to the login page spurred a microburst of nostalgia for the Boing Boing of our yesterdays…erm…literally.

    Of course, it’ll grow on me and, in time, we will all accept the new logo too. The old 8 bit logo will seem dated soon, which is just so weird, considering.

  25. No Sir, I don’t like it – don’t like it one bit!
    But will it stop me coming back? Probably not.

    B.T.W. Some of the text on the right-hand edge of the main chunk is getting sliced.
    And your comments thing seems totally borked if you try to comment anonymously or use the ‘preview’ button.

  26. Ten years. Well played, for sure. Congrats!

    I kind of like the larger typesize, but then my eyesight is for crap. I am mightily perturbed by the headline font — as someone else noted it bears a distressing resemblance to Comic Sans. The kerning is also headache-inducing, just painfully tight.

    But we’re creatures of habit, we humanperson types, so perhaps we’ll all get used to the changes and even come to like them. Except for the headline font thing. That’s always gonna be troubling.

  27. I daresay I shall get used to it, but my initial impression is that it’s a shame you’ve lost that all lovely white space, and I really hate the massive blocks of black at the top of the page; it looks so crowded and ugly now. Also, I don’t like the yellow in the logo, it looks misregistered.

    On the plus side, maybe the page loads faster now? If so, that’s good.

    Also, I got two different “Leave a comment” boxes after I previewed. The submit button on the first doesn’t seem to work.

    …and neither does the one on the second. Let’s see how it works if I don’t preview.

  28. I preferred the old logo, don’t mind the display case at the top, though the one at the side looks both useful and annoying depending on the browser I use, find navigation a bit harder, don’t like the smaller link for comments, hate how it looks on my phone rather than a real browser.

  29. Ehhhh… I dunno. I liked when you guys spun off BBGadgets because it served as your guy’s unique spin on tech. It also meant I had to dig through less stuff to find those articles. I get what you’re doing now, but, with the design looking this.. I dont want to say it looks generic, but black test on white backgrounds with no clear separation between elements just doesnt look terribly inspired to me (and you guys have been among the most creative Ive known sometimes!).

    Offworld.. It looks like you guys are just letting offworld off to float away on its own (1 new post in almost 2 weeks there though, I can understand I guess.)

    I dunno. I guess it just -looks- like theres less boingboing? Prove me wrong please :(

  30. Easy way to reduce usability. I miss the clean whitespace and the fact I didn’t have to click through to read articles. The font is painful. I’ll give it a couple of weeks though.

  31. Congrat’s on the continued success.

    I have to agree with others though – the ‘new’ logo is awful, and the black and red boxes are too ‘heavy’ IMO. The layout’s not bad, but I’d suggest going back to the pixel-ly logo and make the boxes along the top and right side a lighter shade.

  32. perhaps I am blindish, but where did “suggest a link” get off to? Archives? I’ll keep looking…

  33. Oh god what did you do to the logo????!!

    And I like whitespace too. God. What a shock this morning. :shudders and goes off without actually reading any of the surely wonderful content posted since the redesign:

  34. I like it.

    Well, my initial reaction was poor, but I know I won’t notice it in a week or two. Good work, regardless. You’ll always get dissenters with any layout overhaul

    1. I wasn’t making a call, just asking. In an admittedly suggestive way, but still.

      I still don’t like the refresh, but it hasn’t kept me from being interested by and engaged in the usual goings-on here. I think any claims of shark-jumping would be premature based on that alone. There is plenty of boing-boingy goodness all around.

      I still *really* don’t like the refresh, though.

  35. Downloaded and installed BPreplay (a direct link in the article or colophon would be helpful, or was I supposed to have it already?), but Firefox doesn’t actually seem to use it when first loading the page – once I click on a link it starts working though.
    And yes, at smaller sizes (comment titles, display case text) it looks pretty fuzzy on my monitor.

  36. Speaking of features how about adding a “feature” that lets people delete their accounts? Or at least start responding to emails from your users inquiring about your policy on the subject.

    1. amylink,

      You can’t delete your account. Since your account consists solely of your comments, what would be the point?

      1. Moderator Notes:

        – Movable Type has also had some changes. We’re working on the glitches (like no profiles), but finding the correct on/off switches has become a bit of a bughunt, so please be patient.
        – The system has started holding quite a few comments from registered users, so don’t take it personally if your comment disappears for a few hours until I find it and fish it out.
        – Although the visual design is obviously a matter of personal taste, I thought that the old version looked like an inside page of the New York Times. I’m thrilled to see more color and graphic navigation.

      2. Antonious – I just noticed the reply feature in comments. Might this lead to threaded replys in the future? Much easier to follow the flamewars that way.

      3. Having that policy without stating it in your TOS seems just as shady as the stuff that this website regularly campaigns against. If you’re going to have such a policy it should be clearly stated or you should expect questions to be emailed to you about said policy and plan to actually answer them.

  37. Change the headline font. Design aesthetics aside it is way too difficult to read, especially with a black or red background

  38. Love the old-school logo — generally a fan of the new design, but, oh, that headline font is wretched. Thanks for rolling bbg-type content back into the main site. And I see on logging in there’s still some more redesign work to be done :)

  39. Do. Not. Like.

    Font size is horrible – it’s so much easier to read an entire lead-in without having to scroll.

  40. I’ve also got sirdook’s problem with the cut-off letters along the right-hand margin.

    Oh, and the “login” page is still the old one. :)

    Good luck working out the kinks!

  41. I don’t mind change, the logo is great and the font is a design decision I wouldn’t dare question. But what I will miss is the being a separate site. The lower traffic and lower comment count was an enormous bonus for me. I can’t keep up with the 100+ comment threads that occur here with some frequency. Plus it sometimes felt like a private site, like Jalopnik back when you needed a personal invitation to comment. (ahh, those were the days…)

    But but but! I will of course stick around, read, and comment as I have time.

    Change is good, thanks for keeping it moving. Onwards and upwards!

  42. All those little modules just suck my attention away from the post. Heck, the “community, recently” section below the comments just pulls my attention away.

    I guess I’ll override BB’s CSS and provide some sanity for myself.

  43. Oh, gracious me! I forgot to add:

    Welcome aboard, Maggie! You’ll be a really great addition to the regular contributors. Thanks for joining up.

  44. I find the new design harder to read, and it takes more reading to locate the articles in which I am interested. Hence, I don’t think I will visit as often.

    We are all entitled to our opinions. My opinion is that I considerably preferred the “old” design.

  45. Congrats. It will take a bit of time to get used to, but I trust you guys. I’m glad to see that gadgets (and offworld for that matter) is no longer relegated to some side page.

  46. Congrats on 10 years! I love this site, but…

    Guys. Seriously. As I read this post I was seriously expecting to read that this was some old design from the mid nineties that you threw up for the anniversary. This design is far less user-friendly than the old one.

    I don’t fear change. I’ve never jumped on the “OMG THEY CHANGED THE SITE DESIGN, NO!” bandwagon before. This new design is bad bad bad. Please please try again.

    I worked in design for a while, but I’m sure more far more experienced designers will be chiming in on this shortly.

    Congrats again on the anniversary. Good luck navigating these growing pains.

  47. Nah! Do not like! I will have scroll-wheel finger in no time at all. Does NOT render properly in Firefox.

    Change is good but modification is better.

  48. I get a “permission denied” error message when I attempt to use the SEARCH feature of this website. Is this broken, or am I just a bad person, and truly being denied permission?

  49. Another vote (yes i know it isn’t a democracy) against the new bigger font, and also the lack of whitespace. BoingBoing just got MUCH harder to read, and it is now very difficult to see where each article on the frontpage begins – the headings disappear into the body of the articles. Too many images on the front page, it looks far too cluttered.

    One other thing – is the comment form using something that needs low latency? using it here in Australia, it takes something like a second for the comment form to catch up.

    The site seems to be using frankly absurd amounts of CPU as well (Opera 10.00, OS X 10.6.1)

  50. I love Boing Boing, but the re-design makes me not want to read the blog, which is a regrettable urge given how much I typically love your posts. I can tell that I’ll be less inclined to visit the site simply because it’s more difficult to browse and read.

    _Please_ reduce the size of the type, and please use the logo you were previously using. Reducing the size of almost everything on the page would welcome too. Everything is just far too gargantuan.

    I’m not a huge fan of the layout, but that I can get used to over time.

  51. @gibson5string, I’ve gotten permission errors trying to search on Offworld recently, so I think they may be having some issues…

    Really can’t say that the new headline font is aesthetically appealing at all, one bit… But whatever, I come here for the content. Just stay awesome, folks.

  52. It’s … big.

    I apologize for not having 1600×1200 available all the time, but on many of my connection points, BB now is too wide – I don’t know precisely what does it, and it is variable. At one point, I had to side scroll in a full screen 1280 wide window.

    This also shows up when you first launch – those “featured stories” are a bit of a problem for regular readers. We’ve seen them all already. But once those tablets are done at the top, the new top story has barely 20% of the page space. (Sorry, but 1024×768 still exists in the world.)

    Just because newspapers are dying doesn’t mean that you should abandon the concept of “above the fold”. As it is right now, you’ve just made BB harder to read.

    Some blogs use a size controller, although usually just for text. Something like that might be helpful here.

  53. Screw all the naysayers! Things seem to still be unfolding, but it seems like everything is going great! The new web design is awesome — the site loads faster and works at netbook resolution! The staff restructuring is very encouraging to me from my perspective here in the audience — more original writing and less bloggy information relays, better organized moderation and clearer communication! It’s all good!


    (I guess I could have done this comment in all caps but I went with all exclamation points instead!)

    (…Okay, commenting is a little funky right now — no exclamation point for this sentence.)

  54. First I’ll say I am an avid fan of bOING bOING. This is an awesome blog.

    Being in the advertising and design field, I can appreciate a refresh of a brand. But unfortunately, I have to call this one a big FAIL.

    The clean design from before that used to be so easy to read has now become a giant cluster that gives me utter eye strain. There is no hierarchy to this design. I don’t know where to look for things and what I am looking at. I feel like I have gone back to the early days of web programming when people didn’t consider usability.

    The type is hard to read. It feels like overload. Too big in some places. Too tight between lines.

    While I can appreciate your desire to return to some of the aspects of the 80’s zine and the old bOING bOING photocopy days, but there are things we have learned about design, readability and usability in the 30 years since then. Since this is a much different medium, that should be kept in consideration.

    I would really ask you to rethink this revision. I’m not saying go back to your old version, but I’m not for this solution at all.

  55. I was shocked at first, but I like it! I’m getting older…and the new font size helps! Good job! and Congrats on the 10 years!

  56. Please consider re-considering your usage of BPreplay Bold, and bring back the white space.

    People will protest whenever there are changes, and I’m certainly not immune to this problem, but tweaking these two items would go a long way to making this more viewable.

    Did you do any user testing on this new design perchance?

  57. nope – you know what. I’ve given it some time and i have to say how awful the new design is. This really very bad indeed. As just about everyone has stated the header font is horrible and not very good at small sizes. The strong black and red boxes are clumsy and imposing – very distracting.

    Doing a retro style logo is just plain gimmicky. Your old one was very good.

    I know there’s the whole ‘You’ll get used to it’ and yes we will. But that doesn’t mean it’s not a good design

    It looks to me like you’ve all been throwing in your two cents and have ended up with an incoherent design.

    sorry, i hate to be negative about it, but it’s just so monumentally bad.

  58. i don’t personally have much of an issue with fonts and logos.

    But what is it with sites like gawker, gizmodo, the entire group, and now Boing Boing that convert the entire top of the page into ad like boxes and make people scroll down for content??

    Is there some kind of research that proves people have no problems scrolling down for content, and don’t care if the first fold in the browser is full of blocks of graphic, ad-like content??

    Somebody please enlighten me…

  59. I love it!

    I am totally excited by the new change. The old design was getting seriously blah.

    In all things, change is good. Unfortunately, that also goes for your logo. Change WAS good from your original logo to the newer one that was around as of yesterday. Jumping back to the old one… well.. I think you guys became better graphic designers over the years.

  60. So you let Rob fuglify BB Gadgets, and now you’ve let him fuglify Boing Boing. Great. Just great. Never heard “if it ain’t broke don’t fix it,” have you?

  61. I’ll be honest while trying not to be rude; I realize I don’t pay anything to read the excellent content you guys produce, but I wanted to at least register my preference for the previous layout and my distaste for the new one. I think it has potential, but the font, as many have suggested, among other minor details, really does not do it for me. Still, keep up the great work – it won’t stop me from visiting, that’s for sure.

  62. I’ll give it some time to get used to it but initial impression is that it’s way too harsh – I liked the old, smooth, professional look – this seems a bit of a step backwards.
    Having said that, maybe it won’t seem so harsh when I can see it as others do – I’m using Firefox 3.5.3 on XP and the font is blocky/aliased and plain nasty – see here – screenshots from other people show it much smoother and nicer so not sure why Firefox isn’t rendering it the same way.
    Full marks for using an OpenSource font – shame it’s not working for everyone.

  63. I am glad to see the end of Boing-Boing balkanization. It never made sense to seperate the gadget and gaming content from the main page, which frequently featured gadgets and gaming as well.

    Not going to comment on design issues, since this that would be like a telling a new mother that her baby’s head is shaped like a squash. That’s always true and it always gets better.

  64. While I will of course continue to read BB because of the writing and content, and generally like the new design, the logo is.. uh.. i don’t have anything nice to say about it. :P sorry.

  65. I love change, as long as it’s change for the better, and having had a long 20+ year career in design I know that nothing is more subjective than the visual appearance of things. But HOLY CRAP, Boing Boing’s new design is hideous! And the new logo? It’s freaking awful.

    Seriously, guys, what were you smoking?


  66. Interesting rework. More official looking, may verge on more officious. The thing I immediately miss: I don’t see how to get a permalink to an item. I’d gotten used to using those to fork off separate tabs to then read at my leasure…

  67. I believe I may have posted a comment about this earlier, but I can’t recall if I did so in my pre-caffeine morning stupor. Just some constructive criticism, you can take any of the advice, or disregard it as crap – but it all comes from a good place.

    I can see you guys are already changing the headlines on the main page from that atrocious typeface (I think). Was that Vag rounded? DO NOT WANT. It just isn’t a web font – it scales horribly at smaller sizes, and it just makes headlines consisting of more than a word or two somewhat more laborious to read. (I know, I know, woe is me).

    A good example is the comment names/dates, once you take a little contrast away (by making the words red) it’s even MORE difficult to read – and it just blobs up.

    As a publication with a TON of content – your number one concern should always be readability. That being said, upping the text size was a good move in my opinion – but I think it’s just a hair too large. Something in-between the size being used now and the previous size may work better.

    I think you’re squishing the content a big too much with the right side bar – I’d consider maybe taking out a box or two, and making the remaining ones a bit taller and more narrow.

    There’s a lot of screen real estate on the side there being taken up by empty black space, and yes, white(black) space is obviously necessary – but I think the size combined with the contrast is really throwing off the balance of the site overall. When I’m reading the content the site my eye wants to go over to the right side and meander rather than continue on down to the beginning of the next line. Every line has seemingly become a battle for focus!

    …and that logo, oh boy. Now, I understand the nostalgia for many of the writers behind that logo – but honestly, it’s a bad logo – there’s no two ways about it. It’s the epitome of early 90’s design. I think you need to ask yourselves where your readers have come from, the percentage of readers who share that nostalgia for the earlier logo is really low in comparison to the logo which was up just last week.

    So what’s my point? You’re essentially using a bad logo to please yourself and a very small percentage of very early readers. You’re sacrificing the legitimacy of having a good logo for essentially nothing, and possibly even hindering the outward appearance of the blog itself (though the 8-bit logo wasn’t ideal for the purpose of appearance either). It’s a great blog with fantastic writers/readers! Don’t hold it back with a bad logo.

    Seriously, I don’t want to offend whoever may have done the “new” old logo – but hire a well-seasoned designer (I know you know some), show them all your different looks over your past 10 years, and let them develop something new based on that; a proper re-assessment.

    I’m going to stop myself here before I step on too many toes. I tried not to ramble, really!

    Overall, I think the design is a step in the right direction – but it could be better. Please don’t dismiss my critique as any sort of design snobbery, I really enjoy boingboing – I wouldn’t have spent the time rambling on about something I didn’t care about <3.

  68. I’ll get used to the changes, but I need to kick the tires for a few days before I can offer anything but a knee-jerk reaction right now.

    But Maggie is coming back! Smart move. I liked her writing so much during her guest stint, and this news alone makes me excited for BB’s new direction.

    Will miss a separate BB Gadgets, but I guess it always did feel a little lonely out there on its own.

  69. Blah, excuse the few grammar/typos up there – I have a bad habit on relying on the edit feature on most sites!

  70. Now can you PLEASE fix the favourite system so that I can save more than 5 favourites? All of the (rather large) list I had saved to my profile for reading when I have more time was deleting some months ago.

    I’m sure I’ll get used to the new design. Although I’m not sure that ‘more myspace and less facebook’ is really the right way to go. This looks very cluttered and Newser-like.

    Somewhere I’m sure there still exists a clean-looking blog…

  71. After giving it a change for a while, I also notice I miss recent comments, numbered comments (I can understand that there were some problems with numbers, but the quote feature doesn’t make it as easy to find the original comment as having a rough idea of where to scroll back to,) and a layout that worked at 800×480. (Not all of my devices support even 1024×768.) At least I can subscribe to the RSS and not need to go in through the front door, so it’s still possible to see at least most of the content at 320×240.

  72. The headline is the last line of text on my netbook. Oh well. I’m great at scrolling.

    RIP BBG.

  73. I liked the old BBG design; please reconsider. Writing this comment is difficult because I can only see what I’m writing in tiny, light grey type.

  74. Both of the websites that I visit most frequently launched redesigns today: BoingBoing and CBCRadio3. I like ’em both. I like the new layout here on BB, because it seems like you guys are going back to your roots; you’re turning into a true online magazine, with a mixture of content focused on roughly the same topics. It’s pretty awesome.

  75. Saying that Rob is “…a creative force of quantum proportions” doesn’t really seem like much of a compliment, quantum proportions being what they are. Astronomical, interstellar, gargantuan, this I can see. Quantum? Sounds tiny. No?

  76. Trying not to be the sort that just hates anything new, but damn is the font big. There’s plenty of easy-to-download add-ons for zooming in, and many browsers have it built in.

    As for aesthetics, eh, it’ll probably grow on me. But going from seeing a couple articles on my screen to half of one? That just sucks.

  77. I’m not warming up to the new look very well. I actually thought something was wrong with the page or my settings- all the stuff on the right looks like a confused, misprinted jumble. My preference is for clarity over style.

  78. Seeing the old logo/header from the analog BB made me smile.

    My first reaction to the new design: “hey, look. BoingBoing has been hijacked by I wonder if this week’s guest blogger will be Basic Campfire, promoting its campaign to be the new Warchief.”

    The new design is not the new Satan, but I prefer the older design; the lightness of its design placed the content at the forefront of my gaze and attention.

    The visual weight has increased to the point of being oppressive. The design elements themselves demand too much of my attention and energy, and I find myself not wanting to spend as much time on the site.


  79. But, but.. it’s supposed to be a directory of wonderful things! Does this indicate a redirection of editorial attitude?

    And yeah, the black boxes need a reduction in contrast ratio.

    Pining for the old logo? has your solution.

    And on a technical note: I’m having problems commenting. I’ve given up on preview and hoping my spelling is correct.
    Now, just clicked submit and now it’s previewing! what the..

  80. Lisa and Maggie are back!!! :D

    And another good thing is that the ‘directory of wonderful things’ caption is gone: No more “not wonderful, BB” leitmotiv!

  81. Another technical note: my Firefox is really bogged down with this, and clicking my ‘profile’ link at the top just generates a error message. So some of the old quirks are still there.

  82. The redesign disappoints me. Imho, it looks… cheap and cluttered. No disrespect, because I love BB, but it’s also rendered much of the content either unreadable (or too frstrating to try reading) on my mobile device (android powered G1).

    As far as commenting is concerned, what happened to all the old Happy Mutants logins? We’re not using those anymore?

    And the font for boingboing there at the top makes the baby Jesus cry.

  83. Oh, and while I’m here: I know you guys are fixing more important issues right now… But could we eventually upload our own userpic, instead of seeing a pile of balding, faceless ghosts?

  84. Cripes I found it… but yeah, if anyone else is reading this from an android device and NOT having problems with the redesign, please let me know what I might be doing wrong. :)


  85. I’m not afraid of change, and more power to you for the anniversary and the update. But the black boxes surrounding the main text creates an eye-straining contrast. I would think there is a better way to delineate the side and top boxes.

    Otherwise, kudos!

  86. I miss Jackhammer Jill, but that’s neither here nor there – it was nice to see her on the comment login screen, though.

    One usability concern – the collapsing posts. I really like to be able to skim and the collapsing posts completely derail me. I know you’re on the horns of a dilemma – with all the tracks folded into one, the post volume is going to go way up and your 1st page is going to get huge. I’d rather deal with that than with 4 hour old posts getting collapsed – as much as I’d like to, I can’t check BB every half hour. Cas in point – this post is approaching the headline only event horizon faster than I would have believed possible. Yes, I keep up on new posts via rss, etc., etc. but nothing beats sitting down w/ a fresh web page, the electrons still smelling of mimeograph juice…

  87. I appreciate the interim font you’ve replaced whatever that foggy roundness was.

    Putting the two designs side by side with no prior knowledge, I would have guessed that yesterday’s was the streamlined, well-designed new site.

    The boxes are not inherently a bad thing, but the site looks really busy, and chopped into several poorly-balanced segments at any point of the page you look at. The high contrast boxes are interesting, but they don’t let you scan the page as well. The new functionality looks pretty useful, though!

    I’m guessing you guys were expecting to poke around at it some more before it settles down, and I’m looking forward to watching what happens to the design of these things as they change.

  88. Using adblock plus in firefox to block seems to at least make the headlines’ font tolerable and readable.

    Hate the clumsy looking, overly large boxes at the top and right side with all the blaring and distracting pics and what not.

    Not gonna be reading/visiting BB much any more unless it gets easier on the eyes, unfortunately…

  89. I love the idea of highlighting info that might otherwise be nudged to the bottom of the page. I do not love the way the highlighting has been accomplished. There are many pieces of content that appear to be of the same importance–the modules at the top and on the right compete for attention with the articles on the page and this gets confusing.

    Also, without any hint of what the highlighted items are about, I have no way of knowing why I should click on them. Just the title of the post isn’t enough info for me to click away, and we’re just left with a lot of visual clutter.

    I really like the plan for the future of this site, and maybe I’ll grow to love the design, but now it’s a bit jarring.

  90. I love the redesign in terms of the vision behind it. Most redesigns exist just because the old site is stale and they want it to look cooler. But you guys actually have an editorial vision of a renewed ‘zine experience, and you’ve taken steps to highlight that and push the site in that direction. I totally admire and respect that vision and I love reading Maggie’s posts, so it all works out for me.

    I agree though that the not-Comic Sans font you picked can be quietly killed. For the headlines it’s not a big deal, but it doesn’t work on the boxes at the top and on the right.

  91. It’s working better now than it was last night! =D

    Happy birthday Boing Boing!

    The redesign is a step forward.

    I’ll second the call for a “recent comments” ticker on the right somewhere.

    I’ll also second the notion that while your “display case” idea is certainly laudable, the truncated headline, image, and subject heading (Rich Fulcher is “Business”?!) doesn’t really entice. Maybe you just need headlines with more content, but I’d recommend an alt text rollover that gives at least the full headline of the post if not the first couple of sentences.

    Also, you seem to have lost your link to the moderation policy. Perhaps that could go on the new masthead?

    I won’t miss the comment numbers at all.

    Great job so far, and I assume you’ll get the wrinkles ironed out over the next few days.

  92. I hate to be a killjoy, but me no like. It was like a slap in the face to encounter it this morning. I’m hyperventilating, a little. I suppose I’ll get used to it. No one likes change. But, man! Too slick!

  93. well, I have to say I like all of it except the Comic Sans font for the headers. Comic sans is the AOL of fonts. I should be bludgeoned for even suggesting, but even Curlz MT would have been better.

  94. I love you guys, really I do, I’ve been a loyal fan for eons. But as a design professional I feel compelled to voice my opinion on this one…the redesign is painful. Really painful. And not painful in a “oh my, this is new and foreign” kind of a way, but in a “holy shit Comic-sans and Arial Rounded had a mutant lovechild and you adopted it for your headline font” kind of a way.

    Please, for the love of all things tentacled, let this be a a simple case of growing pains that will soon be remedied…please?

    1. Someone deserves a cookie! That was a pretty speedy turnaround my fine mutant friends, kudos on working through those initial growing pains. I think things are looking just dandy now.

  95. The good: Bigger font size is great. New logo sent my nostalgia sensors into overload and I now feel compelled to pull out my Oingo Boingo records.

    The bad: pretty much everything else. The design is awful, the headline font choice is spectacularly poor, the black/white/red color scheme is harsh, and it looks very cluttered. The entire concept is amateurish and frankly, if it weren’t for the excellent content, I’d be embarrassed to show my friends the site.

    Overall, for a site run by bunch of people who are into good, quirky, interesting design aesthetics, it’s very disappointing. It hurts to say so, but I do so as a fan.

  96. Folks complaining about the use of ‘Comic Sans’ – learn yer fonts! BPreplay is the name of the game. It’s an ugly font, it has god-awful metrics, but calling it Comic Sans is still a bit harsh.

  97. Although the visual design is obviously a matter of personal taste

    Actually, the design choices here are a matter of function, not personal taste. And it doesn’t function. Using an open source font isn’t cool if we can’t read the stuff that really makes you cool. The small stuff is especially mushy. Please have a legitimate typographer take a look at your needs and recommend an alternative.

  98. (redacted – my first impressions are, let’s just say, not good.)

    … the ‘display case’ is my biggest beef: dark, distracting, doesn’t actually draw your eyes anywhere useful, pushes the article out of the first screen, and is not a useful feature for obsessive compulsive readers such as myself (and/or its purpose is unclear).

    The reply to comments feature is much appreciated though.

  99. GimpWii says,

    Ow tiny red letters, no comment numbers, and no search without a ‘go’ button make me sad.

    Also, watch the ‘most commented’ algorithm or the burqini post could be there for weeks, reflecting more of an all-time high than a most active.

    The decreasing-size-of-posts-over-time kinda works, will it continue into ‘older posts’? Cause that could be handier still — skimming yesterday’s headlines.

  100. I’m surprised by all the negative comments. I like the new look. The last redesign was nice and clean, but it lacked personality. This seems much more boing boing to me! …and maybe a little bit oingo boingo.

  101. Just to reiterate lest it get ignored in a torrent of design complaints, this design is broken in Firefox – the font on the frontpage is Comic Sans, absolutely massive and very pixelated.

    Strangely, the font on this page is something more normal, although everything is still huge (but that might be a design choice for all I know). Someone please fix this – I don’t want to go back to IE!

  102. I’m indifferent to the redesign, but I like the return of the original logo.

    It’s bOING bOING, not Boing Boing!

  103. Honestly, I don’t find the new design better or worse than before. Looks fine to me.

    Then again, my criteria begins and ends with, “Can I read this shit?”

    If the answer is yes, then I’m good.

  104. There’s actually a bit of a bug with your font embedding, at least in Firefox. The font loads from, but all the permalinks lead to The problem? Firefox won’t allow cross-domain loading of fonts without an Access-Control-Allow-Origin header. (This can be fixed with a “header set Access-Control-Allow-Origin *” directive in .htaccess.)

  105. Good job! Every venture should reinvent itself now and then. The font squishes a bit, but… that will work itself out at some point.

  106. At the moment, no, not liking it – looks like The Sun front page (ghastly British newspaper appealing to those with a reading age of 8). In a week though, who knows?

  107. Gotta love it: it took my complaint, after several posts reading “I like the new look!” Perhaps it didn’t recognize my tone? :P

    Seriously, though, the “Preview” function seems to be derailing the comments.

    Also, in the masthead, you should add a comma after “Doctorow”: you don’t use the serial comma, but Cory needs one after his name. Kudos on the Masthead, too: take a bow, Boingers!

  108. BoingBoing now becomes the second site, after Kotaku, that I’ll now read through rss.

    There are a bunch of things I dislike.

    The first are the hotlinks… everywhere. Exact same reason I started reading Kotaku through rss.

    Second… where is Jackhammer Jill? Seriously. WTF?

    Third… and this is a biggie. I check BB once a day. There are a lot of posts in a 24 hour period. The great thing about the old layout though was that a days worth of posts were all on the same page… in the same layout! Now scrolling down on the new layout and having posts go from one format to a wider one is nothing short of awful if not annoying.

    Merging the two spinoff sites into one… that makes sense.

    Congrats on the anniversary. Too bad about the design. Sorry Rob.

  109. The top section headers look like ads. I miss the BoingBoing jack hammer girl.
    I hate the ad on the very top of the page. I think the media player is a bit too large. I am a loyal fan. I visit BB several times a day.

  110. Intereting – the font on the individual story page (the permalink) seems fine. It’s only on the main page that they’re using the really poorly-rendered font.

  111. Rather a sad day when the most positive remark I can make is, “Three cheers for user stylesheets and the ‘!important’ declaration!”:-)[1] (Especially since the layout DIVs shrink the page width so drastically when browser controls are used to reduce font size.) I’d like to remove the black boxes of “bucket-short” sidebar items, but will p’bly be foiled by the inline CSS that makes the link text white….what’s up with that?

    Sure hope there’s a print CSS in the works (or is printing too old fashioned?). It’s great that the redesign can save BB some bandwidth; now help us save some toner ;-) The red “BB” placeholder image in the “snippets” section has to make the servers at sites like YouTube and Vimeo happier, but they’re lame to the point where I expect you’ll see those entries get less views. Perhaps an automated frame-grab from videos is in the works?

    Obviously a work in progress, but I’m guessing the new logo is final…wow. Jagged lines are pretty much the antithesis of things that go “boing,” no? And while orange was the new black about four years ago, maybe it’s time to try a new trend….

    At the previous redesign I posted laments for the demise of Jill’s animated GIF, and linked to the one BB page where she could still be found. Looks like she’s gone for good now; RIP darlin’. (I can’t really equate the new ‘Colophon Jill’ with the old “Jackhammer Jill’ — I keep expecting Colphon Jill to be assaulted by an 8-bit Bowser at any moment, and that’s just too stressful ;-) Similarly, I’m sad to see the “A Directory of Wonderful Things” tagline go away, but its removal fits the blog’s more ‘activist’ stance of the last couple years. Guess I should be happy that the new zine’s name hasn’t been changed to “Cory’s Big Hot Red Button” ;-)

    Can’t say that I like it, but congrats on the reboot — hope it works out for ya.

    [1] e.g. in your browser’s user stylesheet, add “.swatch-beta h2.asset-name {font-size:1.33em !important;}” and “.asset-header h1,h2 {font-family:times !important; font-size:1.65em !important;}” to tame the goofy headline font, and “.asset-body,.asset-more {font-size:1em !important;}” to control content font size; adjust to taste.

  112. Silly me. I posted my thoughts on the site redesign… but I forgot one of the most important things.

    Welcome Maggie Koerth-Baker. You are a most welcome fulltime addition to the site. Your previous guest blogging stint here was top notch.

    I’ll just be reading your posts through an rss feed instead of the site now though ;). Unless of course there’s they implement a skin to bring it back to how it was for those who prefer the old vs. the new. That would be fantastic.

  113. It really looks like a Gawker site.
    Not necessarily a bad thing, but I don’t quite know if this makes boingboing better.

    The articles on the bottom, with less text and no pictures are a problem for me.
    No longer can one read boingboing by simply scrolling down, because when you get down there, the content is hidden.
    I really liked that you could just scroll down and read, and not reach some nether region with reduced content levels.

  114. A bit of constructive criticism:

    The “BPreplay Bold” font that I only see on the frontpage (not the article page) looks bad for the “buckets” and in general

    The new design is even farther away from validation than the old one:
    (Don’t hesitate to ask if you need some help to fix that.)

    And what is up with ? The new design links to , which not only looks different, but shows different content too. A redirect on the subdomain should solve that.

    Anyway, congrats with the new design. We’ll all get used to it soon enough.

  115. Congratulations all mastheaders. I was a reader of the print zines, bought at Forbidden Planet in London in the early 90s, and I think I can see where bOING bOING is heading. Godspeed!

  116. On my blackberry, I now have to page down six times to see any new content. Very bad.

    On a PC, despite the larger font, the body text seems much harder to read.

    I miss having Jackhammer Jill at the top.

    Overall, I do not like it. Sorry. I know site design is hard.

  117. in my humble-but-professional-web-designer opinion:

    the nav bar should be the most thoughtfully crafted element of any design, but this looks like the exact opposite. you’ll need to resolve that sooner or later.

    the black sidebar is too black, too heavy, too ad-like. did you consider assigning a color scheme to categories (art and design, gadgets, culture, etc) for these feature blocks? you’re sort of doing that with the horizontal feature area along the top, but overall this is way too boxey and too visually heavy.

    most importantly, boingboing could now be mistaken for any of the countless gawker/weblogs template-constrained websites out there. boingboing is wonderfully uniquely weird, and it should have a wonderfully uniquely weird design.

    OTOH, wider columns and bigger photos = yay. and the masthead looks amazing.

  118. Maybe it’s just my machine, but am I the only one who noticed the mangling of image aspect ratios on the right-side links?

    Oh, and add one more vote to the “epic design FAIL” pile. Sorry, guys. I love ya to death, but I’ll be following you via Google Reader from now on.

  119. Unfortunately this reminds me of the re-design BoingBoing Gadgets underwent several months back. After trying for several weeks I had to stop reading from the main page.

    Oh well, I guess that’s what RSS and Atom are for.

  120. I don’t like the new web design or the new logo (too gimicky)…but boingboing is still wonderful

  121. “So you let Rob fuglify BB Gadgets, and now you’ve let him fuglify Boing Boing. Great. Just great. Never heard “if it ain’t broke don’t fix it,” have you?”

    Whoever said that got it spot on. Same thing people said when he ‘improved’ BBG. I cannot see what to read, what to ignore, now. Before, it took 1 second to decide whether or not to read a post or 3 secs to scan a bit further to be sure either way. Not sure this new design will enable that sort of ergonomic. Hasn’t so far.

    IT WAS NOT BROKE! Is Rob on some sort of “if I don’t add visible and dramatic ‘value’ they may not let me play” trip? Or has he hypnotised the rest of you? Slowly diluting everything the BB ‘franchise’ stood for. The franchisees should stick to the franchise rules, not seek to overturn them.

  122. Wired did the same thing months ago. I never visit their site anymore.

    @George57|”I cannot see what to read, what to ignore, now.” – Agreed.

    I’m reverting to the daily summary email delivery (subscribe button works).

  123. Guys guys guys… love you, love the site, I have two homepages and Gmail is the other one…

    But the font complaints are valid. This is a clunky, busy design compared to the old one, which was cleaner. I don’t mind the feature boxes; I do mind that they’re black. Also, I have not liked the move on websites in the recent past to collapse some stories — Gawker’s sites have it down to an exceptionally irritating science. I think it’s implemented much better here, but I’m still kind of disappointed to see it.

    Nonetheless, you won’t lose me as an audience member over it… it’s just that I would be an audience member with happier eyes if a few more tweaks were made.

  124. Double ick with moldy cottage cheese on top. Hard to navigate and I keep getting error messages when I try to email a Posting. Someone’s been drying their hair in the microwave again.

  125. At first I was not impressed with the new layout, but now I am coming round to it. The new font for headings is particularly nice.

    What happened to the ol ‘a directory of wonderful things’ line? There was some discussion a while back, when something about (*spew*) UFC was posted, that the adjective ‘wonderful’ is perhaps not apropriate for this site as some posts here are about activism regarding f-ed up stuff. I therefore propose that the line be changed to: ‘a directory of earthling things/offerings’ – seems to me to cover the good and the bad.

    Also, it is probably something which will be worked out oevr time, but it seems that the search function is not properly operating?

    The big-to-smaller format for chronology of posts also gets my thumbs up. Keep up the good work!

  126. The first thought I had upon seeing this page was “Oh no, they got bought out by Gawker Media. Sad day.” Then I started browsing. Some quick design suggestions to help ease people in to your new design:

    1. Make a mini banner that says something like, “Seeing Comic Sans? Download the open BPreplay font we’re using!” Honestly though, the font looks more clown-ish than off-the-wall and playfully geeky.

    2. Is there a way to have a visual marker that separates the comments from each other, (e.g., wasn’t there a light grey line doing this in the previous design?)

    3. The red hyperlinks appear jarring, as if it’s supposed to be accentuating the text instead of being, well, hyperlinks. See, where it says “*Update* Yup it’s real” – Update is red and bold, and URL is red and regular. I honestly tried clicking “Update”, and I’m a web designer!

    I, too miss the old design and logo, but that’s because I’m more of a clean-design person. This may grow on me over time, but I still can’t get the “did they get bought out by Gawker?” question out of my mind, even though it seems you didn’t. Please keep the good content coming! I thoroughly enjoy reading the articles here, and have a habit of stopping by daily. Good luck on getting the kinks worked out.

  127. I’m really going to miss offworld

    while you guys seem to have given BBG a good replacement with the gadgets category can’t really see the obvious gamer category.

    is it entertainment, action, culture, art/design?

    Perhaps we should trust you guys and see how it evolves but there is a small part of me that wishes we could click;


  128. Well, once I installed a greasemonkey script to flip .asset-body to font-size 14px & line-height 1.5em, kill that off title font from from body (what is it doing in body!), hide #buckets, #beta & .byline img and bold .byline .author, I can again read BB.

    Unfortunately since today’s posts actually end up shrinking down at the end of the page, I would have to check it several times a day now. Sure, that sounds like a great way to drive traffic, but who wants to click on each individual story?! And the archive link points to posts several days older. Sigh.

    I so don’t want to use an RSS reader.

  129. my favorite site on the web, but oh no! second this:
    >Third… and this is a biggie. I check BB once a day. There are a lot of posts in a 24 hour period. The great thing about the old layout though was that a days worth of posts were all on the same page… in the same layout! Now scrolling down on the new layout and having posts go from one format to a wider one is nothing short of awful if not annoying.

    why not just let me go to another page of full-length posts? i used to read top to bottom, but i’m not going to click these collapsed posts one-by-one. and especially not on an iphone.

    and as much as i enjoy the spinoffs, i don’t like them mixed in to boing proper. they were spinoffs for a reason.

    did i mention it’s my favorite site on the web?

  130. Off the bat, not happy with the redesign.

    1. Too busy and cluttered. All the stuff to the right is too big and visually distracting. I can probably adjust to this new style, though.

    2. Bigger issue: I’m a BB completist, and I read every post. But I’m sometimes away for several days, or a week. I noticed already that the posts “bunch up” at the bottom. Is there a way to display the whole month right from the top page? Say a link to click on?

    Right now, you’re only displaying the most recent ten posts, with the 15 older posts only displaying the first part of the post. That’s a pain; I can’t see clicking on every single post just in order to read it. Am I missing a “show all posts” button? And anything past the top 25 are headline only — again, this makes it really tough to go back and look at the last 5 or 6 days I missed.

    Please remedy this, and make it possible to display all posts for the month in full, at least. Thanks!

    P.S. How about a “Boing Boing Classic Layout” button?

  131. THANK YOU for bringing Maggie Koerth-Baker aboard full time! Her guest stint earlier this year was one of the most magical weeks in my love affair with The Internet. I am enraptured by this news.

  132. I don’t like the new design either. Articles near the bottom get reduced to one-liners, that sucks. The old design was cleaner and less busy.

    Can we have a “Log in and choose your format: Classic, New, etc” plzkthx?

  133. As someone still “owed” issues on my old tree version subscription of Boing Boing that was saddened by its demise… a request.

    Please bring back the old layout! This design is way too cluttered. My initial response was did I go to the Huffington Post?

    I agree with many of the posters above and second a request for a “Boing Boing Classic Layout” button. Also, search isn’t working.

  134. Thank you for the feedback (even the constructive criticism)! We’re still making tweaks and ask you to bear with us as some things may change in subtle ways (and somethings may not).

  135. Doesn’t feel like there was enough attention given to design hierarchy. With all the ATTENTION DANGER! red everywhere, I can’t tell what I’m supposed to be looking at. It’s hard to focus.

    Also, the mix and matching of the font families it cluttering and busy and not helping the hierarchy issues.

  136. First, I’m glad all the forks have merged–happy to see all of BB in one place. Second, I’m a fan of BPreplay and use it myself because it looks like it could be made with an engraving tool. The bold feels a little too bold to me right now, but I’m sure it will grow on me.

    Lastly, but not leastly, congratulations on the longevity of your fun!

  137. Another mild complaint about the search, but a curious question: there’s a staff box listing editors and moderators now in the sidebar, but Teresa Nielsen Hayden is not listed, unless she’s now going by a psuedonym.

  138. What will happen to the BB Video podcast? I used to love it when it was updated frequently (daily?) with interesting stuff. The recent stuff hasn’t contained any original reporting – or stuff that captures the essence of what’s really interesting to me on BB. Would love for it to be re-energized. Thanks for a great blog!

  139. It certainly was a surprise this morning to see the changes! I’d say to everyone in general that the new format deserves the old college try on our parts.

    That said, here are some quibbles/critique/suggestions:

    1) I miss seeing Jackhammer Jill at the top of the page!!! I’d love to see her animated again, too, but perhaps that is asking too much…

    2) The new logo has some provenance, so I can see why you are using it. Probably needs to be a tad bigger, though, it’s too easy to overlook at present.

    3) I would prefer a smaller default font size for general text. I’d also prefer serif fonts like you used previously, they’re easier to read and more compact (although I’m willing to admit this is mostly my personal preference).

    4) I’d suggest the return of comments numbered in order, it makes it easier to track and reply to specific comments.

    5) I really, really don’t like the huge, obnoxious “headline” blocks (for lack of a better term) at the top and right sides of each page. I’d consider ditching them at the top entirely and providing some basic text links to popular and hightlighted articles at the right in a single block, where they don’t clutter up the page. But, if nothing else, I’d just consider making the blocks smaller and less prominent. (Frankly, I could live without them entirely, I feel perfectly capable of picking out what’s of interest to me).

    6) While I can understand why you might want to condense posts after a certain point (looks like about 10 posts down right now), I can’t say that I like it. A nice opening series of paragraphs and clear presentation is what makes me want to click and read an article, and a post just doesn’t look as interesting when it’s been condensed down to a few meager lines and a tiny pic… it’s a nasty trend on the web of late, if you ask me. Even further down, I truly detest having a post condensed to headline only… it almost guarantees that I won’t read it. A compromise: would you consider not condensing posts at all until they are at least 24 hours old?

    I offer all of this in the spirit of constructive criticism. I appreciate the hard work you all put into the new look and that you’re open to outside opinion & suggestions. I look forward to further tweaks and refinements. Thanks!!!

  140. I love the new design. I love that it’s like a magazine online. I think it’s a great re-imagining that echoes BoignBoing’s past and points to it’s future! I’m definitely looking forward to the further developments.

  141. Anyone unfortunately seeing Comic Sans, should follow these helpful steps:

    1. Navigate to your Fonts Folder.
    2. Select font “Comic Sans”.
    3. Drag to Trash/Recycle Bin
    4. Empty Trash/Recycle Bin

    (Bonus step)
    5. For good measure, GoTo 2 and repeat for Papyrus, Textile and Curlz.

    1. Funny, I hit “reply” to Ark’s comment above, so I was expecting to see some quoted text in the comment box. Is this still in the works?

      Anyway, I’ll have to quote it myself:

      Anyone unfortunately seeing Comic Sans, should follow these helpful steps:

      1. Navigate to your Fonts Folder.
      2. Select font “Comic Sans”.
      3. Drag to Trash/Recycle Bin

      Thanks Ark, this made me quite happy! I love your approach to technical solutions!

      More thoughts on the redesign:

      I will heartily second the comments previously made about the inadvisability of the posts being reduced to headlines after only a short time. Please leave the full front-page post text up for 24 hours on the front page. There’s plenty of real-estate below the scroll for those of us with a greater than 2 second attention span. One of the things I loved about the old design was the ability to browse a whole day of posts by just scrolling. Worthy posts, like Cory’s Professor Calamity post, are going to be buried way too fast (as noted in the comments of that post). Come to think of it, most of Cory’s posts will get buried this way, since he tends to post in the early AM in England, which is the middle of the night for the US.

      Of course, the recent comments ticker was our best tool for discerning which posts were “hot”.

  142. I’m sorry, I simply can’t stand the redesign. The old one was clean, simple, and easy to use.

    This new one is clutters, stories are shrunk, the new design looks like an attempt to somehow be hip and edgy… the list goes on.

    PLEASE switch back to the old format, or give us an option to use the “classic” view.

  143. My system is resistant to the design change. It’s going to take some getting used to, but my great faith in They That Boing will get me through this.

    Getting Maggie on board full-time is a genius stroke, good call!

    Happy pre-10th, keep up the good work.

  144. I really don’t like this new design… at all.

    I hate the article header font, I hate the bouncing girl is gone completely. I hate the “style”. I hate just reading the article titles near the bottom. I don’t understand the layout. It just looks like a mess. I don’t understand this redesign at all. What was it supposed to achieve? I like newness and I am open to change, but I prefer it to be in the forward direction and either I am dizzy or sure this is backward. I am surprised and disappointed I would have this reaction from a site who I have loved for so long in terms of taste, content, design and ‘tude.

    Pity & I’m bummed.

    I hope to get over it…uga ballew

  145. I like the new posting policy. I don’t like the redesign.

    It just feels old and convoluted, like we went from a 2.0 back to a 1.0….

  146. All right, I hadn’t expected I would wander onto BoingBoing and find a /complete web redesign/. As usual, I’m startled, but Change Rocks.

    Not like I’m not addicted to BoingBoing, anyway. O_O

  147. Don’t like it.

    It is more bearable if I click the “read the rest” link at the bottom to get the usual day by day posts. But I don’t believe that link is bookmark-able (its based on todays date).

  148. When other sites have done redesigns similar to this, I’ve found myself less and less likely to bother clicking on those sites’ bookmarks.

    I find it a very “cold” style, and not at all welcoming or friendly.

  149. My monitor is running at 1280×1024, and it feels like I’m browsing a regular webpage at 640×480, the fonts and graphics are Way too big. Plus the Search function is broken, every time I search I get a 403 forbidden. “Forbidden

    You don’t have permission to access /cgi-bin/mt/mt-search.cgi on this server.
    Apache/2.2 Server at Port 80”.

    but seriously, eek!

    I can’t make any comments about the new layout because I can’t See any of it on one page, all of the photos are too big, the text is too big, there’s too much whitespace, the gaps between lines are too big, etc.

    I tried using Ctrl & -, but that simply shrinks the webpage into a column in the middle of my screen, and doesn’t enhance readability. Using Firefox 3.5.3 on Win 7.

  150. Hated it.

    Then I found the “Read the rest” link at the bottom, which I’d been overlooking.

    Now I don’t hate it as much.

  151. Ok – so “Read rest” works (apart from being about 2 or 3 posts out of date) and looks much more like the old pure ‘white space’ model.

    Please make it bookmarkable as an alternate ‘home page’ for BB or put it at the very very top of the home page so we are only one click away from some sanity. Thanks.
    (Though a “choose your layout – Classic option” button would be better.)

    (Liked the point about Cory getting ghettoed by being in a different time zone. Did you guys consider that when deciding to have such a small number of posts at ‘full’ layout?)

  152. I wish there was a /today or something which always shows the contents of the “Read the Rest” link at the bottom of the page. I don’t visit here frequently enough for the current default homepage view to cover even a significant part of what’s new since I last visited, and I’m already getting tired of the now enforced regime of: hit the end button, carefully click the small “Read the Rest” link, wait for page to load, hit the home button.
    (I understand that you’re optimizing for frequent (many times a day) or very occasional visitors, and that showing less full items by default is the right decision for them, but _please_ also consider people who visit once a day or once every other day.

  153. Can a web site get breast implants and Botox injections? It has an overly slick and sprawling feel to it. If the ugly logo is here to stay, at least get rid of the silly Comic Sans like font.

  154. If the mark of a successful design is people’s willingness to try to get used to it, then the redesign is a smashing success.

  155. Tried to leave a comment earlier, but to no avail… I really *hate* the new look. Esthetically it does nothing for me, just looks cluttered and corporate. But aesthetics aside, I absolutely LOATHE not being able to just scan through the past day’s entries by scrolling. Having to click through to read more than the first few entries completely SUCKS!

    (Can I be more emphatic?)

    I’ve been reading bOING bOING online since 2002, daily. I love bOING bOING. I feel hurt and betrayed by the new look. Foolish perhaps, but there you are.

    Yes, the new headline font is ugly (although I not e that it is only used on the home page) and the black boxes visually overwhelming. Yes it is now painfully large to read on my netbook (without altering the sizing manually). But the worst is the proliferation of teasers at the cost of readability. Please, I beg of you, rethink this design change!

  156. When I first saw it, I thought there was a missing html tag somewhere that screwed up the bottom half of the page. I don’t care for it, but who am I?

  157. I also don’t care for the new layout/design. The font is to big and the layout just makes my brain crazy. It’s confusing, overwhelming and hard to read. I don’t mind change, I’m not just hating it because it’s different, I’m hating it because it’s bad.

  158. Woh! Big, blocky, shouty, err . . . pretty crass really.
    Readability plummets, content minimised, but I guess the designers look at it and see nice reflections of their graphic fashion-preferences so its not going to be changed.

    Do any of the folks that ok’ayed this actually “read” Boing Boing? I mean, read like the rest of us?

    Afraid it does feel like it jumped the shark in forgetting why people look here – content – rather than bold blocky down-w’it-d’kids graphic design.

    How about doing a BB-Lite version – sans big shouty fonts and excitingly framed big shouty pictures?

  159. Every new look is even better than I could have possibly imagined! I will still need you and I will still read you when you’re 64 :)

  160. I tried it again today… it still feels dirty.

    I read all the articles that caught my interest that were in the big format at the top ( last 10… 15?) Then once they changed format I didn’t even skim the titles.

    Again, I read websites once a day. Maybe I’m in a minority.

    A big thing that draws me to the articles on BB are not just the titles… a lot of the time I’ll be drawn into an article by the image that accompanies it. I think images are a big draw. Especially if, like in a lot of cases, the article is about the image (current Ralph Lauren article). Once it gets to text only, or smaller images… meh… I’m not even going to look at them. An example would be the one-liner posts on BB Gadgets. Never once read them. Twitter is a different site… one I personally don’t particularly like. I think most readers come here and temporarily toss away their A.D.D. and, you know, actually read full articles of interest that catch their eye. Not read a bunch of small one-liners. ie, the site and the articles have substance (obviously says a lot about the quality of the BB gang). That’s why you have such a dedicated following.

    What good is a unicorn chaser if I only see it as a text line at the bottom of the home page? No good… because I’ll never get that far down the page to a) see that there is a unicorn chaser, b) see the previous article that required the chase.

    Whoever noticed and pointed out the ‘read the rest’ link is great! I like that format! Unfortunately it defaults to yesterdays articles… but then you can navigate to today’s articles at the top. The downside is that I can’t bookmark the link to today’s articles in the ‘read the rest’ because it’s a dynamic url based on date. I would LOVE IT if you could stick in a mod rewrite rule in the .htaccess file to have a url that is ‘’ point to the ‘read the rest’ layout url for today’s date. That I could bookmark and would like it so much more than reading through rss.

    Anyway… I hope it changes. I doubt it will. Unfortunately a lot of site owners don’t listen to their users when they discuss layout. (They’ve worked hard at building something new that they personally like, are proud of it and it fits their requirements.) But most comments are usually “I don’t like it”… and they don’t help in the least. The first thing discussed in a redesign is what content is needed where. ie, design is built from perceived required content from the owners… then usability and placement… then the actual layout and design. Sometimes through that process the basis of what previously worked, and why, is lost.

    hmm… funny enough my reCaptcha words are ‘poor composition’

  161. I really do like the new functionality, the sidebar stuff, even the headline.

    The design is getting better!

  162. Hey, can we not “favorite” items anymore? I kept track of a lot of posts that way. Are those all lost now?

  163. (I’m trying really hard to just comment on things that are making it harder for me to use the website and not to whine just because I don’t like the way it looks. Because I don’t, but it IS actually harder for me to find things and read the content.)

    The minimization of the heavy black boxes on the right helps a LOT. So I’m going to whine about something else. You really really need to set up a better visual hierarchy. For example, you have headlines in all caps in some places and then caps/lowercase in other places in what looks like two different fonts (that, IMNSHO, aren’t working together that well).

    The red for links doesn’t look quite as loud as it did yesterday (to be fair, it was dark o’clock and I had the lights off) but it’s still pulling too much of my attention and making it hard for me to keep reading the article without skipping around.

  164. Yesterday when I was first startled by the redesign took the time to read through the comments filled with complaints. I’ve been around enough websites and their redesigns to expect that. Change, especially massive redesign with no waring, is never well received. That being said I’ll toss in an “I agree” with most of the constructive criticism that’s already been offered.

    For me the most telling thing was that this morning came here as usual hoping that the new design would have grown on me having had time to sink in. The opposite happened. I was even more annoyed by it and instead of perusing the articles over my morning tea as I have for years I actually IMMEDIATELY chose to go to other sites instead. I generally adapt well to change but my visceral reaction of “GET ME OUTTA HERE” surprised me. I’ve never had that reaction before, even with other sites redesigns.

    The content of this site is, and I trust will remain, stellar. Right now the vehicle that content is in is competing against the content. Not good.

    Looking forward to the continuing changes and hoping they’re enough to convince me to stick around.

  165. I wish the redesign the best. I’m a web designer and this stuff is hard.

    That aside, I am having trouble reading this site now. There is not enough differentiation in the font styles, and the font colors for the post authors and the date/time are not strong enough. The gray is weak. The font itself is not strong enough to carry and register light colors. If you choose to keep the font, please consider darkening your color choices.

    Also the space given to the post text is too wide, the words don’t register as strongly. I find myself re-reading. And the right side of the post space is too close to the right column. I find my eyes straying off all over the place at the end of lines.

    Overall, I’m having to strain to read it. The font and color choices are just not sticking visually. It doesn’t stand out. The subtlety and 2.0ness got taken a few steps too far. It’s more arty than functional. And that is a division that should never be made in a user’s mind.

    Also please think about bringing back separation in header/footer and content spaces. Your footer with your title:subtitle and your rss/policies/subscription/licensing, just doesn’t work. It’s not separated enough from the community, recently section.

    I like it less and less… I really did give it a while too… But it DOES NOT STAND OUT… at all.

  166. The redesign is just awful. Please tell me it’s temporary. I feel like my face has been stuffed into and large print book for the elderly. The new logo looks more horror themed than friendly/techy. I have to scroll along the bottom to see any of the sidebar stuff. Yeah. I don’t get it AT ALL.

  167. I don’t like it. I liked the old site design. Truth be told, I don’t like the Gadgets redesign, either.

    Web site redesigns, in my opinion, alienate the current readers and supporters by trying to attract new ones, and in doing so make it harder for the long-time reader to find features that were somewhere, but now have moved.

  168. Hmm – sorry – can’t stop scratching at the itch…(and sorry if this shows up twice – time-out and temporary marble displacement)

    Judging by the amount of quite detailed, technical ‘constructive criticism’ from people claiming to have some real professional familiarity with the subject, it seems BB’s designer (Rob?) has this time possibly gotten in a bit over his head.

    BBG may have been a sandpit where the objections were more emotional and less specific and could be dismissed, but perhaps here and now on BB itself, the shortcomings – writ large here – deserve more attention to be paid, and more urgently. I heard the ‘we’re still tinkering, it will settle down/improve’ type noises when BBG readers expressed dismay, but it never did. And no heed was paid to any of the criticism that WAS specific, measured and technical. So, did it lose or gain readers after the redesign? It seemed like the comments were much sparser afterwards. I have hardly been there lately – the new BBG design (and the response to comments about it – i.e. no notice taken at all) left an unpleasant visual/reading/navigating experience that outweighed any value from going there.

    Deja vu? I really hope not. I have had thousands of great moments and experiences and much fun courtesy of BB but this is certain to reduce their frequency as things stand. Please pay attention to those who love you and care enough to be honest about the problems. Ignoring this (or not having the humility to acknowledge any possible errors) will damage BB in some perhaps small but certainly meaningful way.

  169. Hmmmm.

    This thread is deteriorating.

    I predict within 24 hours it will just be incoherent agony expressed in all caps.

    Also, no one gives a fuck that you’re a web designer, just like everyone else.

  170. I know, lots of tweaking and consultation and prototyping,
    but that red and black just melts my eyes..

    so I went ahead and made a script that calms down the happy mutant color scheme somewhat. Most colors come straight from the BB’s CSS crayon box. Entirely optional, but me personally I’m of a calmer mutantity for the troubles.

    Oh, and the submit/preview is still randomly effective. 5th try.

  171. That’s neat! The gray feature teasers are too faded, but I love the “Offworld blue” links.

  172. I cannot even scroll to see what the # of my last comment was, but I made a few specific design suggestions and said that, while I didn’t like the commonality I was seeing with some of the design decisions made on Gawker blogs a while ago, I wasn’t planning to leave the site (I’m just far, far too lazy to register for commenting).

    ANYWAY… I came back today and noticed that the black-background boxes I complained about in the sidebar are gone, daddy, gone.

    Thanks for listening! :) I think the changes are a good compromise so far between the old look and the new one. I do like the old logo, but I don’t think which logo I like is very important overall. The page is a lot easier to look at today than it was yesterday, and that’s all that counts.

  173. I guess I don’t really mind that it hurts my eyes, and that it looks cheaper. The real problem is function. What a confusing and unsightly layout. Why do posts appear multiple times in different sizes? What are all the confusing subhead-like things? Great site, but your designer needs some help!

  174. Nice Re-design!

    I’ve been following BoingBoing! since the paper days, and it is always an enjoyable and enlightening read, no matter what the format! Thank you!

  175. Hey guys, whoever you are working with for design – I have to give you credit. You took some of the most serious issues, and resolved them already – good job! This is why I like you guys so much.

  176. Ok, I’m a usability/interface designer and feel a need to comment ;)

    Good ideas overall, a little cluttered in places. It’s a little unclear what each section does. Some indicator of the sections, like a “Featured” marker would be nice, especially on the right hand nav element.

    The category markers are too hard to read. It’s also not clear that they are just filters, unlike the previous version wher BBG took you to a sub page with different stories and editing, and Offworld to you to another place entirely.

    The clarity of the main text is good.
    Navigation within the page is pretty clear.
    The comments link is the only one that seems a bit unclear. The icon doesn’t convey a speech bubble well, probably because it’s filled in (solid black).
    Additionally, showing the # of the comment is pretty much necessary unless you go over to a Slashdot type threaded comment system.

    I would also move the “read the rest” link at the bottom of the page a few more pixels away from the content to more clearly show that it is not a part of the content, yet connected to the content (not too far away)

    But on the whole a good change IMO. Like any other large overhaul it needs a little fine tuning.

  177. Hate it. Seems unfriendly and cluttered and confusing compared with the old.

    Can’t you make it like the “new, improved” yahoo and let us keep the old one too?

  178. It sucks, first freshmeat and now this. Soon the web is just going to look like glitzy crap that corp heads “like the look of” but never read. Who suffers? no one cause not I will have more time to to other stuff that is really interesting to me.

  179. Yay for tweakage! Blowing a bisou or two at y’all for your willingness to listen. Listening is teh hott.

  180. Yikes! This is like coming home to find that your house has been traded in for a geodesic dome plastered with media ads and two fat gnomes dressed in business attire demanding that I convert or go to hell.

    Do not like. Guessing it is time to look for a new place. 0/

  181. Just thinking about what confuses me, as i no longer feel like i really know how to read the blog. 1) what is the block-like subhead for bbvideo that appears several posts down? it looks like a subhead, but what appears under it is not bbvideo. 2) what is the difference between the small items that appear at the end (with the text out to the side of a picture) and the larger sized posts near the top?

  182. i love you boingboing & many many congrats on internets domination.

    But.. you got your tech writer to redesign your site ? As on of the top blogs in the english speaking world, don’t you think its a bit of fark you to the design world ?
    And it does show. You had flava, now you have bland. Also poor spacing, massive banner ads & ugly typography.

    Please please please call Khoi Vinh & get him to redesign it. Seriously!
    Alexei Brodovitch is rolling over in his grave, he can feel injustices in the design force!
    You guys deserve better than this..

  183. If the older stuff is going to be bunched up like that at the bottom, it would help to have more precise titles. BB used to be very good about this, but lately the post titles have sacrificed clarity for jokiness and exaggeration.

  184. The last time I saw such a long list of “I hate the terrible new design, bring back the wonderful old design” was the last time boingboing changed. Funny how that hateful new design has become the loved old one.

    Me, I think I like the new changes, but it will take some time to find out.

  185. I see that you’re responding to the criticisms, which is reassuring. The redesign is looking *better* (although not IMHO better than it did). I hope that you will continue to tweak it in response to the many very good points fellow boingers have made above.


    This new ‘reply’ thing simply does not work. At the end of the thread it says I replied to anonymous – no way to identify in this long thread where the comment is that I was replying to.

    Tell Rob B to do it NOW!!!!!!!!!!

    Good grief.
    PS In fact its worse – how many anonymous posts were there? Which one was I replying to? Nobody but me will ever know, I suspect. Look – either provide numbered threads or automatic quotes populated into reply. Otherwise the ‘reply’ thing is just a waste of pixels. Really broke. I cannot imagine how this was ever for even a nano-second considered by any sentient web user (let alone an alleged designer) to be something that would work as currently implemented. Epic FAIL.

    1. Hi George, see at the top of my post where it says “replied to george57l”? Click on it! It will take you straight back to your rather shrill and over-excited post.

      1. Oh right – well thank you for the information in your dour and unentertaining post. But I still don’t get why numbered posts aren’t a shoe-in – they are an incredibly important visual clue to navigating threads. And I STILL haven’t re-wired my brain to automatically register that the dull thin maroon letters represent links on this new re-design. I guess my ancient and slow brain will eventually catch up (just in time for the next re-design, I expect). ;-)

  187. Arrg. PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE give us the option of a “laptop version.” Provide a button for “Boingboing Classic” with its clean lines and readability. This redesign might look good on a large desktop screen. I wouldn’t know, since I only own laptops.

  188. I’m leaving a comment in this thread because I’m unable to on another article “great things you may have missed”. For some reason there is no “leave a comment” option on that article.

    And why might we have missed these great things? Because unlike before if you don’t come here every single day (sometimes more than once) the articles are reduced to a partial paragraph or worse merely a headline. I love the boingboing writers find but if I’m at all busy I can’t savor the articles every day. Now, with how they are shuffled off into headline oblivion I likely won’t bother to read beyond the current day. The old version allowed me to stroll through the weeks articles at my leisure.

    You’ve put the look of your site ahead of it’s content. Shame on you boing boing for devaluing what makes (or is that made?) this place great.

  189. i loved the old logo…it was fun and witty..what are the design thought behind the new logo?? anyone??

  190. Thank you for listening, the re-design is coming together, you are almost there. Get rid of the top ad its too distracting and cheapens the site. I would rather see more ads on the right rail. Fix the section headers, they need to graphically stand out more. It really is looking a lot better from the initial launch.

  191. Thank you for “fixing” the redesign. I was actually depressed this whole week after my eyes vomited when first seeing the redesign. Site looks much cleaner, and I second the “get rid” of the top ad. In any case, I am now enjoying my boing boing experience again.

  192. Thanks, folks! We’re continuing to tweak here and there. We really appreciate your constructive feedback and also for accepting our penchant for experimenting in public!

  193. I Love (capital L) Boing Boing, but this redesign threw me for a loop.

    Wow. Those fonts are big!

    Gee. That’s lots of white space.

    Ouch. Scrolling down through the posts the older ones just keep getting smaller. And the smaller pics that accompany yesterday’s posts are on the left, instead of catching my eye by being on the right.

    I liked being able to go back through the days and seeing all the posts in their original glory when I missed a day. Now it looks like when I miss something I’m truly going to miss it. Reading through those text blocks at the bottom of the page is too much like actual work.

    Yes. Bigger pics with the posts. File under ‘like’.

    Overall it reminds me of Wired’s clinically staid website. Sorry.

    Anyhoo, a heartfelt Happy Birthday. When I was ten I was wearing gap kids and highwater chinos, so I guess I really shouldn’t criticize….

  194. I know you got a lot of complaints about the retro logo, so I’m not surprised, but am disapointed to see it gone.

    I liked the work Mark, even if it was 20 years old.

  195. The ‘recent comments’ feature is a bit redundant if it confines itself to comments on the page itself.

    It is simply a truncated version of the comments already there, turned upside down.

    The previous manifestation showing all recent comments on everything, although pretty useless, was at least added information, and might lead one to read some other post to find out what the comment was about.

  196. I’m having an issue where in my RSS feed since the redesign, I get the whole article, not just the teaser. It makes it a real pain if there is a large article I want to skip over.

  197. I’m sorry, I’ve been trying to get used to the new design all week and it’s not working for me. Everything is too big and I don’t understand why you put boxes at the top. Don’t like the truncated posts down below, either. Websites where I have to click again to “read the rest” and constantly go back and forth are annoying.

    Boing Boing was always one of my favorites, but I notice that this week I’m not visiting as often as I used to. For this user, your website is not as user friendly as it used to be. Too bad.

    But I di applaud the logo change! The one you were using earlier this week was amusing but reminded me too much of “Strange Tales” comic book from the 1960s.

  198. “reminded me too much of “Strange Tales” comic book from the 1960s”

    And this is a bad thing? You kids!

  199. You should put a notice on the boing boing gadgets site to inform people not to bother checking it since I have been checking it and wondering what the heck is going on, still that Sinclair calculator story for weeks on end what is going on… thanks love you guys

  200. Thank you, mdh!

    Gadgets will soon get all the gadgets content xposted to it, and so will remain interesting for those interested solely in gadget bloggetry.

  201. Please consider reducing the font size somewhat. When I open boingboing in the mornings I have to back away from my monitor. And I’m 48 and use reading glasses.

  202. It’s been amusing watching the changes to re-design slowly creep in – all for the better I might add. But I’m still waiting for a way to read lots of full posts. When I have 20 – 30 minutes of free time I like to sit down and scroll through posts. Clicking and expanding articles I’m not sure I want to read isn’t fun. What happened to the ‘read earlier posts’ link that gave a view with expanded posts? Are you trying to save money on bandwidth? BoingBoing is starting to look like it’s feed on popurls.

  203. HI!

    Just want to say that the new design doesn’t really encourage me to read older articles; the newest ones have all the Big Headlines and Pretty Pictures, but go back to older posts and you get terse, short leading paragraphs and minuscule fonts. Since I don’t get to read BB everyday, older stories are really getting buried.

    Bring the old Boing boing back, please? Maybe as an option?

  204. It’s been a month and I hugely miss the old design. I follow most blogs within google reader but there are a few sites whose simple design and consistently good content made me want to type: ctrl+l, b, ↓, <enter>. For the first time in 7 years I have added BB to my newsreader — my secondary, general info stream that I check after I check my favorite sites. When changed from a blogger style to a more “newsey” design a few years ago they were moved to my reader and got lost in the mix. I hardly read them now and had a hard time even remembering the URL.

    I liked how I could check BB once every 24 hours and the last article I read was somewhere near the bottom. Now older articles just have headlines and no pics. And there’s this stale (to me) content at the top and sides.

    While I’m at it, I don’t like guest bloggers so much. The side bar mini blog that randy rucker (et al?) did waaaay back was cool, and I have enjoyed a couple guest bloggers, but I came for the posts of the original 4 (I don’t bother with the catalog shopping of bb gadgets).

    I suspect these changes are to drive up page clicks, to boost advertising revenue. If that’s the case, I guess that’s how it goes and accept that BB might eventually grow into something I don’t recognize or appreciate.

    But if you’re doing it for us, please stop. Go back.

    thank you for being otherwise awesome!

  205. I feel like the identity of the site has been lost with this redesign. Now it looks like every other blog out there :( I loved the old I scroll for the great content while simultaneously cringing.

    -web developer working in the field

  206. I find this site is a lot less accommodating for people who like to keep up with the site but don’t always have time daily – those mini-summaries are kind of worthless. I figured out I can start hacking URLs, etc but it’s not so elegant.

    Other than that I guess its ok, if maybe geared too much to casual readers.

Comments are closed.