New design - needs improvement

  • 69
  • Question
  • Updated 3 years ago
  • Answered
Archived and Closed

This conversation is no longer open for comments or replies and is no longer visible to community members. The community moderator provided the following reason for archiving: Old thread

I see that a new design is being used for title pages on IMDb, and hopefully this is just a test and not something that is going to be implemented for the long term.

 

I've circled a few of the more problematic areas of the new design.

Rather than appearing in the right-hand rail, the links to additional information now appear above the title. However, the active links (example circled in green above) now appear in light gray on a dark gray background, which is not particularly contrasting and will make it difficult for new users to find the information.

The inactive links (example circled in blue above) are even worse; they're dark gray on a slightly darker gray background. Granted, they are links to information that doesn't exist, but IMDb does want the information to eventually exist, so they shouldn't be so deeply relegated to the background.

Also, I've circled in red the series title for this television episode. The series title is in light gray on a dark gray background, and is only about half the size of the episode title, which is in white on the same dark gray background. I would recommend making the series title and episode title about equally prominent, rather than making the episode title much, much more prominent than the series title.

All told, I would prefer if this design change wasn't implemented at all, but if it is going to be implemented, I would prefer if the design would avoid the extensive use of gray on dark gray as shown above.
Photo of gromit82

gromit82, Champion

  • 7029 Posts
  • 8391 Reply Likes

Posted 4 years ago

  • 69
Photo of Keester

Keester

  • 208 Posts
  • 98 Reply Likes
My present pet hate is the new wider/see through dropdown watcthlist. The way it flickers, then has all your lists ticked then changes its mind and only ticks those that you actually ticked is driving me mad. Somebody need a lesson in CSS.

The previous format was JUST FINE. Why change it?
Photo of Keester

Keester

  • 208 Posts
  • 98 Reply Likes
Santa will be delivering a small lump of coal to all the naughty IMDB staff responsible for the new design.
Photo of sunofabeach78

sunofabeach78

  • 7 Posts
  • 5 Reply Likes
Hi,
I tried to give the new design a few days to see if i can get used to it, because every change is difficult at first, but after a couple weeks the new design STILL looks BAD, or at least worse than the (very very good and useful) previous one:

1) The biggest problem with the new title banner, is that it's too BIG! It takes a lot of space in the screen and makes you scroll down to see even the basic information about a film. In pages where exists the (huge) trailer video, you have to scroll down to see even the director/writers/stars information of the movie, or even the whole storyline! This is very frustrating, NOT easy to use and certainly not user-friendly.

This problem is more serious when the title of a movie is long and takes more than one line: In that case, the banner is even bigger, so big that you have to scroll down to see the whole poster or the whole trailer of the movie! For example, a movie with a long title: "Astérix & Obélix: Au service de sa Majesté (2012)".  That page is a disaster! You even have to scroll down to see the whole poster and trailer! The same happens with many movies with long titles, and also with every series, because in the series' pages there's an extra line for the "episode guide", which makes the banner even bigger!

2) Another problem is the colours. A dark-grey background combined with white or (worse!) light-grey letters, is not a good idea! It's just harder for the eyes to read and ugly. What happened to the white (or very light-grey) background and black (or dark) letters? Why change the best colour contrast, when it's successful and working fine?

Also, the new title banner's colour is almost the same as the IMDB's banner and the advertisement banner, on the top of the page. This means too much black or dark-grey colour in the page when it's loaded, which again doesn't look nice.

3) The trailer. Suddenly, it gets TOO BIG and takes a lot of space on the screen. Also, it's wrong that it moved above other information, like storyline, directors, stars etc. The size and place it was before was just fine, most people STILL visit an IMDB page first to READ or to BE INFORMED (storyline, info, director, stars etc) and then to WATCH (trailer or whatever). The new trailer size and position only makes the site less friendly to the users.

4) The new rating system. Before we needed just one click to rate a movie. Now it needs two clicks, which means the time required to rate a movie is doubled. If it's one or two movies is not that big deal of course, but if we are trying to rate many movies, that extra time needed (and the inconvenience) is considerable. (This is not a major problem compared to the above, but it still adds to the frustrating and not user-friendly new design).

5) Another minor problem is about the "year of release" link.  (Note: i think we were all relieved to bring it back, it would be a huge mistake not to be included to the new title banner!). Now that it is back, when we move the mouse over the link of the year, the link doesn't change colour, from grey to blue like the rest links on the title banner. It stays grey. It would be nice if it turned blue, like the other links.

Overall, the feeling about the new design is that it's NOT GOOD. It's worse than before, clearly worse in all aspects: not practical, not eye-friendly, ugly, less easy to use, to the point that sometimes becomes frustrating. You should consider very seriouly bringing back the old one, or re-designing the new one to something better!
(Edited)
Photo of William B. Mauk

William B. Mauk

  • 3 Posts
  • 4 Reply Likes
This reply was created from a merged topic originally titled The redeisgned website hell!.

Isn’t it nice
when you visit a familiar website you can easily navigate because you have used
it for so long you instinctively know where you want to go? You do what you
want and can move quickly because you've done it so many times it has become
like the neighborhood you live in.  You
have favorite locations you visit regularly and others you bypass because they
aren't applicable to your goal.  You
navigate your cyber neighborhood with ease!

Then
one day you return and some arrogant lunatic has shuffled all the buildings
around!  Repainted them all in different
colors, renamed all the streets, and created new address numbers!  You can not find your friend's houses or your
favorite shops because the inconsiderate, thoughtless meddler has so completely
transformed the entire neighborhood that you can not even find your own
home!  This is what happens when a
webmaster redesigns a website in an attempt to justify his continued
employment!
Photo of Peter Haacke

Peter Haacke

  • 2 Posts
  • 3 Reply Likes
This reply was created from a merged topic originally titled New design doesn't let me rate.

When I tried rating the big short today it suddenly didnt work anymore, i treid other movies but they also dont work.. I think this is the first time im rating movies since the new design. I can still rate from lists but cant rate from the pages itself. Anyone else have this problem?

Really dont like the new design.. dont understand why so many companies change stuff to "improve" their sites when it just makes things look fancy but work less easy and streamlined. Bloody "innovation" for sake of "progression".. (sorry for the rant)
Photo of Sanjuro Ouaneup

Sanjuro Ouaneup

  • 11 Posts
  • 18 Reply Likes
Looks like the new design is for everyone this time around and it's not the test phase anymore. In short, we're screwed. It's stupendous that in spite of all the people complaining for a reason they decided to stick with the ugly grey, the clunky interface, the bad everything. No one in his right mind would support the changes. It's like Imdb staff doesn't use Imdb. Perhaps they only use Imdb Pro? Is this a marketing ploy?
Photo of Mark Vallerand

Mark Vallerand

  • 1 Post
  • 6 Reply Likes
You NEED to add an option in user preferences to revert to our old beloved interface. I don't like the new one. I'm looking at alternatives to IMDb.
Photo of Christian van Beers

Christian van Beers

  • 53 Posts
  • 9 Reply Likes
Why doesn't the opinion of IMDb users matter anymore?
(Edited)
Photo of Keester

Keester

  • 208 Posts
  • 98 Reply Likes
Did it ever? I've often raised issues with IMDb and they mostly go ignored; not even a 'thank you for your comment'. My concern on the new design seems to have passed everybody by, including other users. The dreadful all list ticked on then only those that should be ticked flash is one of them. Doesn't anybody else see this?
Photo of Abhay Bhatt

Abhay Bhatt

  • 91 Posts
  • 56 Reply Likes
I think that movie plot summary which was earlier shown just beside the movie poster(just in movies with trailers), is now being shown below the movie trailer, which is not good.
There are many people out there who don't have time or Net speed to watch the trailer. Plot summary is a universally more important thing and its not good to now require users to scroll down every time they want to see the plot summary.
I hope Imdb will reflect on this change they've made and undo it.
Photo of PETE MARTIN

PETE MARTIN

  • 6 Posts
  • 5 Reply Likes
This reply was created from a merged topic originally titled New format.

The new format stinks.  Much harder to use.  Harder to get information about a film.  Not pleasing to the eye at all.

There was nothing wrong with the page format before (not that I could see, anyway).  Why change it?!?   Change, just for change's sake???   Completely don't understand this way of thinking!   You and Apple must get along great.   Neither of you have heard, "If it ain't broke, don't fix it."   You don't understand that concept at all, apparently.  Thanks for making my life just a little bit tougher.
Photo of Keester

Keester

  • 208 Posts
  • 98 Reply Likes
Going to IMDB everyday, updating my lists, rating movies & TV programs, reading reviews, searching for something new to see all USED to be FUN. It no longer is and I cringe at the thought of having to struggle to see any of that dirty white text on a dull black background. I shudder at the thought of having to make an EXTRA click to rate a title or click on the watchlist button by mistake when I should have just hovered and waited for the equally hard to read drop down box to appear. I flinch at the thought of clicking to add a title to a single list then have to hover off then hover back and see all my lists ticked for a second then flash and only show the correct list selection.

I'm not sure how much longer I can take this as my beloved IMDb has changed for the sake of change ignoring regular users comments such as "don't fix what ain't broke" while all the time making more things broken or hard to find. If IMDb had been in charge of inventing the wheel we'd probably all still be waiting for it while they messed about deciding what color it should be.
Photo of jager.marc

jager.marc

  • 4 Posts
  • 6 Reply Likes
ABSOLUTELY AGREE!
CHANGE WEBSITE BACK THE WAY IT WAS! PLEEASE

Changing websites like this has become an infuriating epidemic!
Constantly 'updating' websites for no REAL reason!
Result? Websites become convoluted, over-crowded, confusing and often just plain stupid.
Sometimes it's a legitimate effort to cram more and more info and features...but seriously, it's beyond ridiculous in most cases.
ALL big business/companies have great websites because they've been around for years.
The sites are functional, effective, intuitive(for the user).
This is where they should STAY/STOP.
WHY FIX what isn't broken?!
When the user has to re-learn where everything is (layout), or worse, now can't find what they want or waste more time accessing it, the site has FAILED!
We(users) have increasingly short attention spans...so cramming sites full of useless 'innovations', fluff, pop-up, pop-out, sub-sub menus, fluff, jazz, more and more and more, is COUNTER-PRODUCTIVE!

If you have a department who's job it is 'to make the website better', perhaps that is the problem!
(this is the ONLY reason I can think of, for constant website updates/re-designs/overhauls: I.e. They would be out of a job if they did nothing, so they have the impossible task of constantly adding more, or switching things around)...

Enough already! Depending on the function of the site or course, a website should be a simple outline of the entity with a FEW clear links (via simple menu) to what people want.need. PERIOD.
it's not complicated. That's all we want and all we need.
</rant>

p.s. I used to be a website designer and have a lot of experience in design/PR/sales/advertising. (I'm not just a crazy person... I love iMDb and just want to to get back to the simple, effective and easy to use site it used to be)
(Edited)

This conversation is no longer open for comments or replies.