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
Starting today, the site doesn't appear to be consistently following this setting. Some pages do view in the correct reference-view layout, but clicking a link to another page tends to undo this and present the unwanted new-style layout.
I can still manually access pages by appending "/reference" to the URL, so the feature is clearly still active - the site just seems to be ignoring my account preference for this view.
Go ahead. We can't stop you from what you're doing to your site. We can, however, use it less. As your site is paid for partially by ad revenue, that's on you.
Totally dislike the new format when you click on an actor's name to see other things they have appeared in. Please go back to original fornat
There's no point in even having an account if you're going to ignore you user's preferences.
Dear person(s) in charge at IMDb,
and pardon my french, but >>>WHAT THE F***<<< did you just do to the wonderful simplistic, clear and neatly arranged layout of the actor pages (and the episode ratings pages, and who knows what else you destroyed as well!)?!?? I am shocked!!! :-O
The now "new" view is totally and utterly BS!!!
An abysmal regression in clarity and usability!!! >:-<
A few days ago everything was perfectly fine, as it has been since the beginning (or at least give the users the option of checking a box in the general site preferences to get the "old look" back indefinitely, like it was until a few days ago!).
Today I wanted to look up some actors and firstly also thought I wasn't logged in, because I was given the new layout (which I back then, when you initially introduced this unusable crap, disabled instantaneously; back then we fortunately still had this option!).
The page design I was now given is this just recently revived flashy (but completely impractical!) layout mess, which I hate so much and have been hating since the first time it was introduced at IMDb! >:-<
There is a great and immensely user-friendly page design/layout out there, you already have it, and millions upon millions of people love it and do not want anything else (because: why change an already perfect environment!?!!!).
Why do you now forced this unusable crud upon us without an alternative?!?? >:-<
Hey, IMDb, please listen good:
I DEMAND THAT YOU GIVE US BACK THE OPTION OF DECIDING FOR OURSELVES WHICH DESIGN/LAYOUT WE WANT TO SEE AND USE !!!
You can not establish a great work environment and then, after years and years and years of people using it >>>and above all loving it very much!<<< just willy-nilly take it away, that is a very mean and sadistic move on your part!
Not to mention that this is NO PROGRESS AT ALL, but instead it is PURE REGRESSION! >:-<
Real progress would make using IMDb even more clearer and user-friendly, but apparently your definition of "progress" is to take away a all that is good and replace it with garbage!
I am very enraged about you now trying to take away the perfect and most ergonomic way of using IMDb from us, the users! >:-<
PLEASE GIVE US BACK OUR PREFERRED LAYOUT, PLEEEASE, I IMPLORE YOU !!!!!!!!!!!!
A loyal IMDb-user for many a moons
Note: This conversation was created from a reply on: Upcoming changes to several IMDb features.
It's been 6 days... and... I can't stand any second of the new layout.
Everytime I open a name page it's like a nightmare, I always (unconsciously) think "oh that bug, right, but it will go away, just close the page and think of something else".
but it doesn't go away.
I don't think I'll ever 'get used to it.
I CAN'T BELIEVE THAT IT IS OVER !!!! That my IMDB IS OVER !!!
PLEASE GIVE US BACK THE REFERENCE VIEW FOR NAMES !!!
At least give us a fair option
What can I do for you to change your mind ?
hate and loath new name pages - what are we, children who need coloured illustrations? How can I get rid of all the garbage you've put on the name pages and just have written information lists. It's taking forever to download the pages because of all the the redundant pictures.
Please don't remove the reference view or add it back.
The new layout we're being forced to use is cluttered, unreadable and incomplete. It doesn't flow well. It's hard to fish out the most important information - what a certain person has done (it is, after all, what defines their career and therefore their existence on your site...)
We're not old and crusty change haters, the reference layout was just something that worked well for the intended purpose. So it should be no surprise that we're disappointed it is being forcibly removed.
You're alienating your most faithful and long-term user base.
So, WHOA, now (just now!) they just changed everything up again! Now the reference view looks much more like the non-reference view pages (which is damn annoying!), and all the left-side menus have moved to the right side! WHY? Change for the sake of change? At least give us a REASON! Maybe your ambition is to make the site uglier? That's certainly been a success.
Okay, so at least we now have the opportunity to adjust how many cast credits we want to see, and how many episodes of a TV show we want on the display list - all right, I'll count that as an improvement.
But: Why has the box office/business page been removed? Will it be back?
And the starred ratings now only appear as a number. What if someone comes to the site for the first time and sees a 7.8 rating. 7.8 of what? Without displaying all ten stars, people won't know that the ratings are about how many stars out of ten. It LOOKS STUPID.
Note: This conversation was created from a reply on: Update to User Reviews.
Being a film buff, IMDb used to be my favourite website to visit and I couldn't possibly calculate the huge number of hours I've spent poring over film trivia throughout the years.
However, since the beginning of the seemingly never-ending changes (ditching of the forums, this retiring of the "old" page view, etc), which the powers that be have decided to implement, I've enjoyed visiting less and less. It may look prettier (though I don't see how) to some, but for those of us who visit and contribute regularly, it is no longer easy to navigate or user-friendly.
I really hope that the decision to retire the "old" page view is reconsidered, or I will be visiting the site much less often in future.
"Reason: Inaccurate information " ... Not so inaccurrate IMDb censor! Look at the number of answer here.
You should work on your design instead of censoring users opinion.
- change the current name pages to expand all categories per default
- make a new name page (call it reference view, contributor view or whatever you like) where all categories are expanded by default. If making a new view, please also consider condensing the view to one line instead of two per title. For instance, for Sean Connery it is enough that it says "Goldfinger (1964) ... James Bond" instead of
James Bond "
All professions in the media IMDb report on will do fine with one line per title instead of two, with the very rare exception of some extremely long titles that would get line separated anyway, those being a "problem" even now.
I often go in on a person's page, thinking "didn't I see him in so-and-so sometime, or was that someone else?", so I go in, click ctrl+f to use the browser search, enter my so-and-so title, and get no results. Before, when we had the reference view, that would mean I was thinking of someone else (or the 1% where I did a typo or something). Now, however, the TV credits may have been expanded by default, and the title I was thinking of was a movie (or vice versa), and thus doesn't show up in the browser search when that category is not expanded. It isn't exactly helpful, nor very modern to limit what we get to see, now that computers are more powerful than ever.
It is also super frustrating, as some others here have pointed out, that when you expand a category, click at title and then go back to the list again, the category is condensed again.
The option to always show ALL categories in full should be an option under General Options, along with similar options, like the title reference view. There should also be choices of whether you want to separate acting jobs by media (the current default) or show all acting jobs in one list. Personally I think it would even be useful to have a choice to combine ALL jobs into one list, for instance
Bad Taste (1987) ... Derek/Robert
Also Director, Producer, Writing, Film Editing, Special Effects
Such a view would make someone's career easier to follow, as well as making the pages a lot shorter, with a movie listed only once instead of up to a dozen.
I know people who registered an account on IMDb after 2010 solely for the reason of getting the name reference view, exactly because it had the option to always show all titles. We need that option back, regardless of what you call the view. I realize you may not want to make it the default view, as some name pages may get very long that way, but it should at the very least be toggleable in the General Options.
Until recently, filmographies for 'foreign' individuals listed each of their films original, non-English language title as its primary title, but also listed one or more English language variants. Now, only the original title appears. This makes it extremely difficult for non-native speakers to (for example) easily locate or identify a film by its (generally more commonly known) English title. For example, I do not read Italian; consequently it has become very difficult for me to peruse the filmography of Italian actors/directors and find what I'm looking for without guessing and/or clicking on multiple films to see if I can hit on the right one. Along with other recent changes which I've noted in other conversations, this has made the site a lot less user-friendly than it once was. Surely even IMDb's mobile interface (the reason given for so many other changes) could incorporate this simple and extremely helpful tool?
This conversation is no longer open for comments or replies.
This conversation is no longer open for comments or replies.