First time on this forum, to be honest, didn't even know this site had one. The forum link is buried up there with a bunch of other stuff. Guys, the site design is very ancient. It needs a serious update. A fresh look for the forum, better layout for reading stories, improved search—honestly, the whole site could use a modern revamp 🙃
What! Fuck no.
It's fine as it is. And the forum is hardly 'buried', the link is right there on the front page.
If you don't like this website, go back to where you came from. The rest of us will just muddle along with what we are happy with.
Are you even a premium member that has an investment in the website? Have you contributed anything besides criticism?
OK, I'll bite.
Give me an example of a site that you consider 'modern' that works well for reading and discovering stories.
Have the navigation bar become invisible for you? Would you prefer a more hidden navigation system, like a hamburger menu that contains all the navigation and is revealed with a click?
I'm seriously curious and open to suggestions for improving the site.
One thing I realize from having other sites using the same engine is that the top lists don't always work when a site is young and doesn't have as extensive of a library.
As for better search, well, that require payments and is available.
missing a lot of modern UI/UX basics, navigation's a mess, the fonts are ugly, and the buttons, text formatting ah they just look rough. this is coming from someone who did web dev and design back in the 2000s. I'm not criticizing, just throwing out my perspective
navigation's a mess, the fonts are ugly, and the buttons, text formatting ah they just look rough
Fonts are very subjective to an individual. A site owner has to choose a font that appeals to the greatest amount of individuals. Are some people going to be annoyed? Yes, it's inevitable, but the majority hold sway.
Navigation is easy, but then that could be because the layout has not changed in decades, and as a new user, you have to find your way. The good news however, is that once you do, you will never have to go looking for things again, as it will be where it was last week, the week before that, and the week before that...
As to the buttons. To be honest, I've never paid much attention to them, they are just a means to an end. I'm not here to gasp in wonder at their symmetry, their pixelation's, their binary splendour. I'm here to read the content that lies behind such unloved, unnoticed (by me, at least) typographical resplendent sumptuousness.
missing a lot of modern UI/UX basics,
Like what for example.
navigation's a mess,
How so?
the fonts are ugly,
OK, so you prefer sans-serif as you said in another reply. That's one thing that I can work with to change.
and the buttons,
You don't like shadows I guess. You prefer flat. How about rounded corners? what's your preference? rounded or square?
text formatting ah they just look rough.
Which formatting exactly?
this is coming from someone who did web dev and design back in the 2000s. I'm not criticizing, just throwing out my perspective
Come on man, you can't say you're not criticizing when you're doing nothing else.
So far you've simply said 'I don't like this'. I need an example of what you consider to be good looking, otherwise it's all nothing more than trolling.
Give me examples, give me something to work with. Wide generalities are useless, and nothing more than empty/negative criticism.
For a throw back to the 90s switch your theme here to the classic one :)
okay since you're asking: chyoa,lushstories,literotica just a few examples. Tons of links too but well-spaced, not cluttered. As for fonts, sans-serif works best on screens (cleaner lines, less clutter, great for minimalist/modern designs), serifs help with print readability (little strokes guiding the eye). One graphic design rule I picked up back in the day
chyoa,lushstories,literotica
I haven't been on Literotica in years (probably decades) so I don't know what it looks like now, but back then I found it cumbersome to use. I mean, really unfriendly. But, again, that was many years ago so I don't know what it looks like now.
I find the look and feel of SOL great. I'm on a Macbook Pro with an external monitor using Classic mode so I don't know what it's like on a mobile device. I don't use my iPhone for that. I guess that's because I'm old and stuck in the past (LOL) even though I spent a career in IT.
I have not used others, but Literotica is okay. Its default is sanserif, although that can be changed. I am pretty agnostic to the serif question.
Their layout is okay, but then so is SOL. The unstructured tags make Lit more difficult to search; the search (including size, rating, state, etc.) is much better on SOL.
As for fonts, sans-serif works best on screens (cleaner lines, less clutter, great for minimalist/modern designs),
So the only thing specific that you mention is sans-serif fonts, which all the listings have.
You're not giving me anything specific.
I'll try to create a theme that fulfills the things that I'm trying to figure out from your generalities.
One thing you can do is download a listings page from the site. download the stylesheet, on your system edit the stylesheet to make the html page look as close as possible to what you envision, and send me the stylesheet. Of course, don't create new #ids or classes, but modify what's existing.
Take your time. Have fun with it, and when you're done I'll see what you created and if it's good, I'll create a theme for it.
By the way, I looked at your account's settings. It seems you're unaware of the power that the system gives you as a reader to customize your settings. You're using the defaults.
I took the liberty of switching your story display style to a sans-serif font. I didn't change anything else.
You can revert to the default if you wish or make any changes you like (colors, fonts, text width, background color, display styles etc...) here:
https://storiesonline.net/sol-secure/user/style.php
I'll try to create a theme that fulfills the things that I'm trying to figure out from your generalities.
Until you get specifics and agree with those, I would not waste time on creating something no one might use or even like. Even the original poster.
The original poster was a web designer. He should be able to be more specific than he has been.
For a throw back to the 90s switch your theme here to the classic one :)
... Which work great for me, especially on a mobile device. And I've adjusted the defaults to have the story pages use white-on-back for maximum contrast/least eye strain. (Only problem is I can't distinguish visited links on the contents page of a story.) So I'm glad to hear your reassurances that you're not going to be making sweeping changes!
Please don't go changing things for ONE complainer!
I don't.
If you're referring to the 'continue reading box' this is not related. I explained it in the relevant thread.
However, I am creating a new theme. And like all the themes, they are selectable.
If it's not too presumptuous, I'd like to jump in by bumping my own post about that topic I made a year ago: https://storiesonline.net/d/s6/t11949/design-proposal
Since then, my eyes didn't exactly get any better, so...
all this hostility just for suggesting a design update? wow i had no clue that was off limits here. I'm not here to critize anything, just giving my 2 cents. and i don't mind paying for a premium member its just this site layout is rough for me
First time on this forum
Are you a web designer? Do you follow other story sites? (probably best not to name them).
'Modernising' the site with all sorts of flashy (flashing) gizmos might work for some businesses and gaming sites and social media, but stories are more sedate. Readers want to be able to read without distractions.
I suggest you cogitate more.
AJ
i'm not anymore but i still notice these things. When i say modernizing I don't mean throwing in "flashy gizmos", modern websites don't work like that anymore, these days it is all about simplicity, less is better, no random shadowed buttons, no ugly serif fonts, no tacky icons eye straining contrast, etc
I don't mean throwing in "flashy gizmos", modern websites don't work like that anymore
I wish you'd tell that to my utility companies. It's almost painful, stepping past all the flashing bits to get to my latest bill.
AJ
It's almost painful, stepping past all the flashing bits to get to my latest bill.
I think you need to have a word with an electrician and get that wiring seen to, somebody could lose a....
I think you need to have a word with an electrician and get that wiring seen to
It's fine - it saves me the trouble of getting the defibrillator out when I need it.
AJ
When i say modernizing I don't mean throwing in "flashy gizmos", modern websites don't work like that anymore, these days it is all about simplicity, less is better, no random shadowed buttons, no ugly serif fonts, no tacky icons eye straining contrast, etc
Out of curiosity, are you aware of how contradictory that statement is, in relation to your original post?
"these days it is all about simplicity, less is better, no random shadowed buttons, no ugly serif fonts, no tacky icons eye straining contrast, etc" That's the definition of this site! 😂
look I won't name the "other" sites, but you can google them. This site is up there with the best, but visually it's stuck in the past, like 20 years in the past
This site is up there with the best, but visually it's stuck in the past, like 20 years in the past
I know, and I love it for it. Granted, that is my opinion and it may differ from that of other, miss-informed, mistaken people...
all this hostility just for suggesting a design update? wow i had no clue that was off limits here. I'm not here to critize anything, just giving my 2 cents. and i don't mind paying for a premium member its just this site layout is rough for me
There is an old and very pertinent adage, "If it's not broke, don't fix it."
As Laz asked, how (in your opinion) could the site be 'improved'. What is it that needs to be done exactly?
Your suggestion is not 'off limits'. Laz has always been very open to improving the site and it's functionality. There is even a forum dedicated to exactly that (this one) and Laz almost always replies to suggestions. Sometimes, it's to agree with the suggestion and he will implement it (when times permits), other times it's to say why the idea is not possible. Regardless of the outcome, all sensible ideas tend to be replied to, and he has done for years (the maniac...).
Anyway, could you explain to Laz and all those reading this, why the site is 'rough'? Do you have trouble with certain colours? I think there are different colour schemes available if you have chromatic issues. It might be worth trying one of them. Or is it because there are not enough flashing lights and distracting banners?
I can see how the site might be problematic for individuals with ADHD, and who need a constant barrage of stimulus to hold their attention.
For me it's the complete opposite. I love the site because it's as beige as you can get. There is nothing to distract you from the simple text. Reading stories here is a pleasure because there are no pop-ups or flashing banners/borders.
And everything is where you left it. You don't access the site and everything has been moved, or been re-named since your last visit. (My personal bug-bear is when supermarkets move everything around to 'keep things fresh'. Just don't. I want the beans to be where they were the previous week and the week before that...).
How can the layout be improved for reading stories, exactly? You can't get much simpler and easier to read than what currently exists. Unless you know of some means to directly imprint stories to the brain that's better and more efficient than the MK1 eyeball.
This isn't an attack against you. It's a request for more detail.
It's also worth noting that what's 'fresh' this week might not be 'fresh' the week after. This isn't a fashion site, it's a story site, and caters for more individuals than the ones who have the attention span of a tik-tok video.
I'm not here to critize anything, just giving my 2 cents.
The problem with that statement is you presented your 2 cents in the form of criticism. Lazeez has repeatedly requested specific examples of what you feel is wrong with the site. The couple of items you mentioned don't justify 'modernizing' the entire site; that is especially true since you haven't defined what you mean by 'modernizing'. Apparently you have made no effort to use the 'My Account' features that allow you to customize your display; since, according to Lazeez, you are using the default settings.
So far, all I've observed is you telling us that the entire site needs to be modernized' because the site does not conform to your personal preferences, such as your dislike of serif fonts. Then you are surprised about the other posters 'hostility' about you wanting to change things to conform to what you want, when most of us are satisfied with the majority of what Lazeez has created for our use.
So far, you participated in 2 threads on this forum. In the second thread, which you created, you indicated that you did not want to conform to the rule about not writing about under-14-year-old characters engaging in sexual activities.
As I said yesterday - if you are unhappy with SOL, then perhaps you should go back to one of the sites where you are happy.
P.S. If you haven't read the Story Posting Guidelines and Information page, then you should do so.
improved search
If you want "better" search options, do a search with the engine of your choice and add site:storiesonline.net to your search string. That only works to a certain extent (not all of the story content is available to external searches) but it does help under most circumstances.
It is a great site. Think of all the similar sites that have gone away because the authors and readers stopped supporting them. SoL wouldn't be here if all the authors and readers didn't love it enough to support it.
This has been my main site for a LONG time, I think close to 20 years. I like the site as it is. Sometimes the changes/additions take a little getting used to, but they don't change the overall design and flow of the site, which is a big plus as far as I am concerned.
I also visit Beyond the Far Horizon once in a while. Gina is also a webmaster, and her site works, but to my mind it doesn't flow as well as SOL does.
I will stand firmly in stating that there are times when it is better to just add new features within the existing structure than tearing it all down and rebuilding. Laz has added and updated a lot of features over the years WITHOUT changing the basic flow and structure of SOL, and I think he is due some recognition for the great job he has done and is continuing to do.
"tearing it all down and rebuilding" is a wild exaggeration. A site redesign just needs a decent UI/UX designer to tweak some CSS and maybe a script or two. If I was still in the industry i'd do it for free
It seems to me that the SOL pages are designed to serve the readers. Refreshing! I like it.
I, like others, have grown comfortable with the site as it is. In response to the original post, I went back to the home page and tried to look at it like someone new.
It has a top row with 8 links, a second row with 15 more, then two yellow bars for topical announcements, and two dozen more links down the left sidebar. That's a total of roughly fifty links, which might be a bit much to navigate for a new user.
I don't know if that's what englishnospeak refers to, since their complaints are rather general. There may be a better approach to organizing all the links. For example, I can imagine how combining the two Search links into a "Search" menu might help, for example, or perhaps a "Stories" menu that also includes the "Authors" and "Collections" indexes.
It probably is possible to provide a choice of fonts on the account settings page. I don't know how hard that would be, and I personally am happy with the default font.
I don't understand the rest of what the original poster has said. More specific examples would help.
I can imagine how combining the two Search links into a "Search" menu might help
I prefer to click once rather than twice (2 steps).
I've been a paying subscriber supporting Lazeez for 20+ years.
A complete redesign and "modernization"?
Please Lazeez, no. Do not fall for that ploy.
SOL and sister sites are just fine as they are.
Please Lazeez, no. Do not fall for that ploy.
The site's engine supports themes. If I were to 'Modernize' it (Again for 2025), then it would be through a theme and if I were to ever make it the default, you would have the means to switch back to a theme that you prefer.
I am weighing in on this because this is a public forum, and we all have the Freedom to express our views—even in Canada and the UK. ;)
By most modern website standards, SOL does look "dated." It hasn't really changed much in the twenty-plus years that I've been visiting it. Not in the front end, at least. I'm very aware that the back end is a very different beast from what it once was.
But there is a reason it hasn't changed much over the years. It's simple (which is good), it's familiar (in the sense that everything pretty much stays in the same place, which is also good), and it's reasonably easy to navigate (which is more than good).
Compared to the "other" places mentioned, I wouldn't encourage anyone to adopt any of those designs. They are not good.
My sole criticism is the front page is very "text heavy." I mean, yes, of course it is; the front page is a feed of stories & blog posts, of course, it's text-heavy. But compare it to Bookapy, which is its sister site, I believe?
Bookapy has a similar top menu/sidebar layout but is visually much different, and, I'd suggest, it is more eye-catching/pleasing. Given that SOL is now generating "covers" for books that don't have one, would it be possible to introduce a "cover" oriented front page, similar to Bookapy? Images, however small, break up the blocks of text, which is a good thing.
I also like the way that Bookapy's front page is split into categories - Recently released, highest rated, best sellers, etc. Even if the "covers" were not adopted, maybe this is something that could be. So you could, for example, have a section with 4 or 5 newly posted stories, then a section with 5 recently updated stories, 5 new blogs, then with the 5 highest rated, 5 most downloaded, etc - in other words, the "top lists" from the sidebar as categories on the front page. Essentially, I suppose this would just be giving the "stream" a bit more structure.
I'd also suggest that it might be nice to be able to "follow" an author and then updates from those authors you follow would be another (maybe even the first) category on the front page.
I guess what I'm saying is that there isn't really anything wrong with SOL as it is, but that doesn't mean there isn't room for improvement. Change for the sake of change is definitely better avoided, but change that enhances the user experience is something worth considering.
So you could, for example, have a section with 4 or 5 newly posted stories, then a section with 5 recently updated stories, 5 new blogs
I don't think you realise how many new stories and updates are posted every day. If the display limit was 5, many stories and updates would be booted off before they were even on. At the moment, every story by every author is usually on the home page for at least 24 hours, giving readers in the various time zones a chance to notice them.
AJ
5 was a random suggestion. Just making suggestions, that's all. If the current layout is best, leave it.
As I said, change for the sake of change is not desirable, but change to enhance the experience should be considered. The question then is, what would enhance the experience? If no ideas are put forward, how can we evaluate their merit?
I get your sentiment... but, at the same time, I have to disagree with a lot of what you wrote.
Fact is, the site's design is still from a time when nobody gave a rat's ass about things like accessibility and screen readability.
The prime example for this is the font-sizes being defined in pt instead of em values. pt is meant for print ONLY. It's an absolute unit, defined as "72pt = 1 inch". In print, 1pt is the size of a period dot. In screen displays... 1pt varies between operating systems and display manufacturers because of the varying DPI settings, so it can't be a single pixel on modern displays. By default, the text on the front page is 10pt. On my monitor, an upper-case "A" is now all of 2mm high. I have to either zoom the site to 200% or glue my nose to the screen to read it.
Or the dark-gray text on light-gray backgrounds, the dark-green text on light-green background, the light-gray text on white background... All of those make it virtually impossible for people like me to read most of the text. The contrast value is simply too low.
And the virtually non-existent whitespace between text-lines and elements makes the whole site just appear like one, hazy mess of text. No clear-cut borders, no structure, no separation, no organization. It makes the whole site harder to use than necessary.
And if something is getting highlighted, it is so extreme (bright-yellow or neon-pink) that it becomes not just an eye-catcher, it becomes a distraction, an anchor-point my eyes keep jumping to while trying to find what I'm actually looking for.
Also, let's talk about the menues.
For decades, we used 4:3 monitors, and had a menu-bar on the left side of the site. But now, when we all have widescreen monitors, and there is more than enough space to either side of the content area to place link collections and menues, we suddenly move the menu to the top? Where it then, of course, has to be multiple rows because of how many links it's supposed to hold, pushing the content down.
I solved those problems by installing a style-AddOn to my browser that lets me write my own CSS instructions. Right now, it seems like the amount of users with the same troubles as me is too low to warrant implementing those changes. However, I am convinced that this is a self-made (and self-sustaining) problem:
- The site has poor accessibility
--> Struggling users DON'T use the site BECAUSE of the poor accessibility
---> There are too few users on the site struggling with accessibility to bother fixing it
when we all have widescreen monitors
Really? How did you discover that, when management don't even know what country they're in, let alone what sort of monitors they have. And what about readers who read stories on their smart phones and tablets?
AJ
I deliberately didn't talk about smartphones and tablets because those have gotten their very own design. You can activate it by clicking the phone-icon in the top menu bar.
I think starting a talk about responsive design would go a little beyond what is possible.
And regarding the widescreen monitors... I just checked with the computer store where we buy all the stuff for the company I work for. The only 4:3 monitors they still sell are 8''-displays meant to be used as surveillance monitors.
I just checked with the computer store where we buy all the stuff for the company I work for. The only 4:3 monitors they still sell are 8''-displays meant to be used as surveillance monitors.
My local computer store sells 12" laptops, but they're intended for domestic users working to a budget.
My monitor is 14". I have a larger one (also 4:3), but the one I'm using has simpler user controls.
AJ
And what about readers who read stories on their smart phones and tablets?
Phone users (mobile) are 55% of the site's users.
The prime example for this is the font-sizes being defined in pt instead of em values. pt is meant for print ONLY. It's an absolute unit, defined as "72pt = 1 inch".
Only the initial font size is set in points. The rest are indeed in em. You can't set the initial font size (rem) in em as em is a relative measure. In all browser css handling, 1pt is 1/72 of an inch. 1px is 1/96 of an inch.
I can use pt or px. Can't use anything else to define the rem. If I switch the rem to px I'll have to simply make the number slightly bigger.
I don't know what kind of monitor you have, but how about you email me a screenshot from your computer, using the default settings on the site and let me examine what you see and what is problematic. my email is what you expect: lazeez at storiesonline.net
Yes, the site's design is text heavy. Could be lightened up a little and could benefit from adding more white space. As for contrast, that actually does heavily rely on the contrast/color calibration of your monitor. I have color blind people visiting the site and they don't complain about the contrast. When they did for the few things they complained about, I fixed it.
I concur that lit and lush aren't the best examples as a style or structure guide. But I'd also hate to a view like Bookapy's. The one thing I love most here as a reader is that I have all the information about a story at one glance - score, word count, finished or not, update date, and of course the long blurb and the tags in a font size my poor eyes can still decipher. It would be nice to have the option to include pictures in the stories list, but as an addition, not a replacement for other info.
The way I see it, it wouldn't need all that much to get a more polished look. This is what I'd try to do:
- The rounded corners and drop shadows make it appear overloaded because we aren't used to that anymore, and they could be done away with easily.
- Underlining links has been mostly done away with for the same reason, so it's worth a thought (a few exception are possible where the link isn't really apparent otherwise).
- More use of material style buttons instead of links.
- Descriptive hover labels for main menu links would be nice, which would remove a lot of ambiguity and head scratching for new users.
- Those double right arrows next to the top list links aren't really needed.
- Maybe position the edit/add note button somewhere else so it doesn't take up a full line.
- More modern icons for mobile view and the add note button.
- Harmonize font sizes. At a quick glance, I spotted 8 differently sized sections, sometimes just fractions of pixels apart.
- Lastly, the option to turn off the background image. Some people like the paper-like dusting, others hate it.
The top lists might be condensed into drop-out menus (a short text could still explain that there are a lot of different lists hidden underneath the buttons). This would free ups space and allow the "My Library" entry to move to the sidebar. Quick Search, Category Search and Advanced Search could all go into the top menu bar (which would grow a few pixels in height, tho).
Just my thoughts. I know that I'm not brilliant in design, and there may be reasons why things are where and how they are which I'm not aware of.
- Those double right arrows next to the top list links aren't really needed.
I had to go look for them. I never saw them.
I'd also suggest that it might be nice to be able to "follow" an author and then updates from those authors you follow would be another (maybe even the first) category on the front page.
This is already available to all. Click an author's name to their story list and there is a Follow link at the right of the header bar. For authors you are following that link becomes Unfollow. Instead of a category there is a separate 'My Stream' tab which shows updates - stories and blogs - from followed authors.
There's an old saying usually attributed to at least one of the US armed services: If it ain't broke, don't fixit!
Seems like the consensus of opinion is to leave the website as it is.
Me thinks that englishnospeak's problem was with the story reading interface and once I switched his style to a sans-serif font, he was satisfied.
...once I switched his style to a sans-serif font, he was satisfied.
Whereas i find Serifs much easier to read.
*shrug*
Whereas i find Serifs much easier to read.
That's the reason I created the system for customization. You can pick what you like.
Whereas i find Serifs much easier to read.
ISTR a study which found serifed fonts were easier to read (provided the serifs were not excessive) whereas the sans- fonts were visually more appealing and were perceived as more precise. Don't ask me what or when; back in the mid '80s part of what I was doing involved large font design for embedded systems but I don't recall if it was then or I noticed the article later.
My takeaway from that - for reading, use a serif font, for instrument readouts use a sans one.
ISTR a study which found serifed fonts were easier to read
Actually, multiple studies have shown this to be 'depends'.
European produced books tend to be typeset with sans-serif fonts, while north-american produced books tend to use serif font. That's what kids are exposed to in schools growing up.
So if you ask Europeans, you'll tend to find that they find sans-serif easier to read while north-americans tend to favor serif. So the results of such studies are region-dependent.
For an individual, preference is more likely related to where the individual learned to read.
I am not a web designer or anything close to it.
I started with asstr, somewhere over 2 decades ago. Then, due to my writing some stories in "The Swarm Cycle" I found this site. I have occasionally tried some of the other sites when a story that I have heard of is reported as being there. THIS site is consistently the easiest to navigate and find what I want. I have 95% given up on trying so use any of the other sites, although I still try on occasion.
Old fashioned? Who cares. This is what I will use.