The new website is looking good

[BeyondLies_MintForum]

There's much that is good about the new website. For instance, the new logo looks good. Here, though, is some criticism of the main webpage.

1) The '"Uma"' confuses.
2) The white text on the green background has insufficient contrast.
2) The black text on white has (to a lesser extent) insufficient contrast.
3) The 'web' box gives the false impression of being clickable.
4) The first and third claims in, 'It works, it's safe and it doesn't break' perhaps exaggerate how good things are. It would give less of a hostage to fortune to have: 'It works well and it is safe.'
5) 'Linux Mint stands on the shoulder of giants, it is based on Debian and Ubuntu.' That sentence is ungrammatical. Commas cannot conjoin clauses that could stand on their own as independent sentences (and failure to observe that grammatical nicety can lead to imprecision).
6) The conjunction of 'Have any questions?' with, 'Fun, helpful and passionate' confuses.
7) There is a scope ambiguity in 'Linux users are often welcoming, helpful and eager to share their experience.' (For, just what does the 'often' apply to?)

[AZgl1800]

yes, it is a fresh new design that should attract more dissatisfied Windows users.

Kudos to the team that put that together.

[t42]

Website is nice just several small things can be modified a little.

One question - why in Links Github is located under the Social column.

[Grayfox]

Like the new look.
Looks less like something from the mid 2000s
Are the forums going to get an update?

[chavic]

Like the new look.
Looks less like something from the mid 2000s
Are the forums going to get an update?

I don't think that's gonna happen soon, the forum works and help people to find topics of interest and help, but a dark theme could be something cool

[Moem]

Are the forums going to get an update?

I don't think that's gonna happen soon, the forum works and help people to find topics of interest and help

Giving them a slightly different look would not change that.

[Grayfox]

but a dark theme could be something cool

Its not professional looking, but so far it works for me.

[chavic]

Its not professional looking, but so far it works for me.
https://userstyles.world/api/style/preview/1145.webp

Yeah I saw your dark theme in other post, it looks so cool

Giving them a slightly different look would not change that.

I know but at least a refreshing theme is not a bad idea it brings another color for us

[Night Wing]

@ Grayfox

I like your dark theme look for the Mint forums. Unless I missed it, where did you get your dark theme from?

[Grayfox]

@ Grayfox

I like your dark theme look for the Mint forums. Unless I missed it, where did you get your dark theme from?

Made it.
It is currently v1.5b
Working on 1.6b

Somethings dont look right.

Once I get all rules done.
I will redo it and try to stick to some normality where colors are more consistent through out the forum as a whole.

But the theme requires the Stylus extension.
Theme can be obtained from here and you can also view the RAW CSS code too, I left a huge amount of comments on each rule so if you want to tweak it, you can as each comment gives you an idea of what it controls.
https://userstyles.world/style/1145/dar ... orums-beta

[redcarrot]

Dear linuxmint team members

Great job on the website!

Just one tiny suggestion. There is a mention that some parts are not open source (most parts are).
It would put users at ease to know if there is any proprietary software being used. Maybe a small link could be added.

Once again great job! Looks really professional

Regards.

[xenopeek]

if there is any proprietary software being used.

That depends entirely on the choices you yourself make. Did you buy a computer with devices that don't work without loading closed source firmware? It can be the case Linux Mint (through Ubuntu or Debian package bases) has that firmware and if so it will load it on computers with those devices so that they may work. Do you need some programs despite them being closed source — like Spotify, Skype, Dropbox or Minecraft — some such are installable through Software Manager as a convenience. It's entirely up to you.

[MurphCID]

Looks really nice. Great job guys! I also like the post above with the darker forum. But well done.

[Mintmann]

You were really fast, it was just put online If anybody spots any problems, let us know.

Why do we have to have another log in for the Community?

[xenopeek]

Websites are on separate servers, don't share a database.

[treysis]

I am deeply missing IPv6 support. Why was it not added?

[mattlach]

You were really fast, it was just put online If anybody spots any problems, let us know.

It seems to be working well.

I'm not a fan of modern UI design, but that's about it.

IMHO, a UI or web page should be:
- Desktop focused (no compromises for mobile browsing
- Information dense (no big open dead space, or large buttons for fat fingers. Don't waste screen real estate)
- No animations, transitions or "click to reveal" type of menus.
- Avoid flat squares or tiles. Lists are always a far superior way of organizing information.
- High contrast for clarity (way too much of the web these days are using subtle shade differences and its is really dumb)

In a world where UI and web design is going to hell in a hand-basket, at least the Mint site remains usable, which is more than can be said for most others.

I often look to the Debian project for good website design. They keep it simple, low bandwidth and very very usable. The latest version over there has more dead space and bigger buttons than I would like (damn touchscreen compatible bullshit) but is otherwise near perfect. I think the mistake too many make is trying to look pretty and impressive, when basic and simple is usually best.

I would like to get my hands on whoever out there is teaching modern UI design though. I'd give them a piece of my mind for sure. They are instructing students of user interfaces to do everything in the absolute opposite way than what maximizes usability.

I mean, don't get me wrong. The new one is WAY more aesthetically pleasing, but the old one was superior in every other regard. Usability, simplicity, bandwidth/data use, you name it.

[Grayfox]

I am deeply missing IPv6 support. Why was it not added?

IPv6 is assigned to you by your provider but fact of the matter is few places have it as you still need IPv4 for legacy support.

[mattlach]

I am deeply missing IPv6 support. Why was it not added?

IPV6 definitely solves the IPV4 exhaustion problem, but IMHO in every other way it is a serious downgrade from IPV4.

I wish we could just throw it out and start over from scratch. I have never in my life seen as serious of a design fail as IPV6.

I would do it over with a -h option to make it human readable.

It was clear we needed more IP addresses, but we didn't need more IP addresses than there are atoms on earth, either today or in any conceivable future. I would have kept it human readable, instead of the hexadecimal mess it is. Maybe just add another 8-bit octet to IPV4 and calling it a day?

Also, I would absolutely have kept NAT. Making every device on planet earth 1:1 is more of a problem than it solves and breaks all kinds of current privacy and security designs.

Some may find it annoying, but I for one LOVE having my private LAN on a separate IP address range.

I have disabled IPV6 on my network. I am also trying to firewall off any and all IPV6 tunneling protocols so absolutely nothing IPV6 works on my network, but this is much more difficult unfortunately.

Until I am literally forced to use it by remote sites becoming inaccessible, I will fight IPV6 with all that I am worth.

[mattlach]

For shits and giggles check out some historical mint websites here:

First Design (October 2006)

Functional but a bit basic :p


Second Design (December 2006)

Boilerplate, but nicer!


Third Design (also December 2006)
Third Design (October 2007 with More content)

Still a bit boilerplate, but even nicer!

Fourth Design (October 2007)

The recent one we know and love (wow, it was around for 14 years!)